Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The key findings were: 1) The allegation of clandestine removal and evasion of Central Excise duty by diversion of duty-paid inputs was not sustainable. The shortage detected during the physical verification was not reliable as the finished goods available in various sections/sheds were not considered, and the CCTV footage provided by the appellant was disregarded without proper inquiry. 2) Denial of CENVAT credit was not justified. The appellant had established the receipt of inputs in their factory with documentary evidence. The statements relied upon by the Revenue were inadmissible as evidence since the request for cross-examination was rejected without valid grounds. As long as duty payment on outputs is accepted, the benefit of input credit cannot be denied when the appellant has satisfied the requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
