<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (2) TMI 103 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52693</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal concerning alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of cotton yarn. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner&#039;s assessment that the evidence presented, primarily based on seized private notebooks, lacked corroboration. Discrepancies in records and the absence of affirmative evidence regarding raw material purchase, manufacturing, labor payments, and sales were pivotal. The Tribunal found the Revenue&#039;s reliance on the notebooks and statements insufficient to substantiate the charges, ultimately deeming the demand unsustainable and dismissing the appeal for lack of merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2024 11:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91170" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 103 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52693</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal concerning alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of cotton yarn. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner&#039;s assessment that the evidence presented, primarily based on seized private notebooks, lacked corroboration. Discrepancies in records and the absence of affirmative evidence regarding raw material purchase, manufacturing, labor payments, and sales were pivotal. The Tribunal found the Revenue&#039;s reliance on the notebooks and statements insufficient to substantiate the charges, ultimately deeming the demand unsustainable and dismissing the appeal for lack of merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>