<?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 (10) TMI 190 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54900</link>
    <description>Failure to make mandatory excise record entries for goods found inside or outside the factory, including non-entry in RG-I and non-debit in PLA/RG 23A Part-II, can sustain confiscation and penalty even where invoices exist. The Tribunal treated the absence of proper accounting in prescribed records as a serious statutory lapse and rejected the view that invoices alone negate evasion. It accepted that a separate proof of clandestine removal or direct intent to evade is not always required where the record-keeping violation itself establishes duty evasion. The Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s finding of no evasion was reversed, and the order setting aside confiscation and penalty was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:26:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 190 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54900</link>
      <description>Failure to make mandatory excise record entries for goods found inside or outside the factory, including non-entry in RG-I and non-debit in PLA/RG 23A Part-II, can sustain confiscation and penalty even where invoices exist. The Tribunal treated the absence of proper accounting in prescribed records as a serious statutory lapse and rejected the view that invoices alone negate evasion. It accepted that a separate proof of clandestine removal or direct intent to evade is not always required where the record-keeping violation itself establishes duty evasion. The Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s finding of no evasion was reversed, and the order setting aside confiscation and penalty was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54900</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>