Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Karnawat International Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Jaipur-II

2016 (7) TMI 223 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of duty for non-export of imported marble after processing - Revenue alleged that There was discrepancy of imported marbles noticed on physical examination. Appellant did not maintain properly. There was diversion of imported material and indigenous material were only exported. - Held that:- Revenue found stock discrepancy, that went against appellant. When the probability is weighed, the appellant failed to prove leading cogent evidence that exports were made out of the foreign materials .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l Member Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate for the appellants Shri K. Poddar, A.R. for the Respondent ORDER Ld. Counsel submits that the imported goods after being polished have been exported. There was also no discrepancy in the stock record. Revenue merely alleges that the marbles imported did not go back in the course of export. Exports have been made under bond. Neither redemption fine is imposable nor also penalty be imposed. 2. Ld. A. R. says that conducting physical inventory, series of lapses in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e allegation in the show cause notice. Imported materials were found short in the course of investigation. They also noticed that exports of the goods made were out of indigenous raw material. So also breach of import condition resulted in loss of revenue. 5. No cogent or credible evidence was shown to reconcile stock discrepancy found by investigation. Appellant failed to show the exports were made out of foreign marbles imported. The stock inventory reveal discrepancy. It is held by Hon ble Ma .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

went against appellant. When the probability is weighed, the appellant failed to prove leading cogent evidence that exports were made out of the foreign materials imported. Physical verification results demonstrated discrepancy of stock which was acknowledges by appellant. Revenue need not prove where the discrepant goods have gone. It is assessee to explain the shortfall. But failed to do so. Such material fact cannot be brushed aside under pulpable plea that diversion was not proved by Revenue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version