<?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>2005 (2) TMI 205 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53835</link>
    <description>Duty demand for alleged clandestine removal of scrap cannot be sustained on the basis of an uncorroborated lorry driver&#039;s statement alone, especially where there is no independent investigation, no purchaser statements, and no supporting documents such as trip sheets. In the absence of the assessee&#039;s admission or other reliable evidence, the statement was treated as too vague to establish clandestine clearance, and the demand was set aside. Penalty for irregular Modvat credit was sustained because the credit had been taken on seized goods and later reversed, but the amount was reduced as excessive in light of the limited credit involved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:05:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92312" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 205 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53835</link>
      <description>Duty demand for alleged clandestine removal of scrap cannot be sustained on the basis of an uncorroborated lorry driver&#039;s statement alone, especially where there is no independent investigation, no purchaser statements, and no supporting documents such as trip sheets. In the absence of the assessee&#039;s admission or other reliable evidence, the statement was treated as too vague to establish clandestine clearance, and the demand was set aside. Penalty for irregular Modvat credit was sustained because the credit had been taken on seized goods and later reversed, but the amount was reduced as excessive in light of the limited credit involved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>