Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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 / RSS

Revenue's Appeals Dismissed: Insufficient Evidence in Branded Khaini Tax Evasion Case Emphasizes Need for Concrete Proof.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Clandestine removal - evasion of duty - clearance of branded Khaini - burden to prove on Revenue - Ultimately, the High court concurred with the majority view of the CESTAT, which had found the evidence against the respondents unreliable and insufficient to establish the charge of clandestine removal. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed on the grounds that the allegations could not be substantiated beyond reasonable doubt, underscoring the need for tangible evidence to support claims of tax evasion and clandestine operations.....