https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82146 The appeal was allowed, leading to the setting aside of the confiscation of goods, the duty demand of Rs. 8,39,047.48, and the penalty of Rs. 20,000.00. The Department failed to provide substantial evidence to support their assertions, relying on assumptions and suspicions rather than concrete proof. The burden of proof was not met by the Department, resulting in the decision in favor of the appellants. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2011 12:19:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82146 The appeal was allowed, leading to the setting aside of the confiscation of goods, the duty demand of Rs. 8,39,047.48, and the penalty of Rs. 20,000.00. The Department failed to provide substantial evidence to support their assertions, relying on assumptions and suspicions rather than concrete proof. The burden of proof was not met by the Department, resulting in the decision in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82146