Supreme Court: Marking a Document as an Exhibit Does Not Prove its Contents  ||  Supreme Court: Unpaid Consideration Alone Does Not Invalidate a Sale Deed  ||  Bombay HC: Questioning Other Varsities' Degrees Could Cause 'Anarchy and Chaos' in Education System  ||  Allahabad High Court: Regularization Claim Survives Employee’s Death Through Legal Heirs  ||  Allahabad HC: Advocates Failing AIBE Within 2 Years of Provisional Enrolment Can’t Continue Practice  ||  Bombay High Court Directs BCI to Scrutinise and Clear Pending Law College Affiliation Approvals  ||  J&K HC: Circulating WhatsApp Message on Local COVID Cases Does Not Attract Section 505 IPC  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Signatory Can Be Bound By an Agreement if Involved in Performing the Contract  ||  Supreme Court: 'Washed-Off Theory' Inapplicable in Assessing Employee Retention Suitability  ||  SC Directs States/UTs to Grant Ex-Servicemen Quota to Cadets Disabled 40% or More in Training    

CESTAT: Penalty Under Central Excise Act is Not Sustainable by Third Party Evidence - (19 May 2022)

EXCISE

Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has ruled that the demand of duty and penalty under the Central Excise Act, 1944 is not sustainable by the third–party evidence.

Tags : CUSTOMS   EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL   CENTRAL EXCISE ACT   1944   DEMAND OF DUTY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved