Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2018 (8) TMI 5

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER The dispute pertains to the confirmation of duty liability along with interest thereon, the imposition of penalty and fine in lieu of confiscation of goods that were alleged to have been removed clandestinely by M/s Adarsh Silk Mills, a proprietary concern of Shri Kulbushan Aneja. Order-in-appeal no Th-I/RKS/44/2012 dated 10^th April 2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xcess stock of finished goods which were seized; in follow-up action, the goods covered by packing slips recovered from their possession were detained and subject to seizure. 4. He contends that the particulars in the packing slips sufficed for compliance with the said circular and that only in one instance were they unable to furnish any documentary evidence of an invoice having been issued wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Central Excise (Adj.), Mumbai [2014 (304) ELT 591 (Tri. Mumbai)] as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai v. Kalvert Foods India Pvt Ltd [2011 (270) ELT 643 (SC)] and contends that the goods had been removed clandestinely against packing slips which in no way contains material particulars corresponding to invoices and that the appellant had no....