https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109923 Inconsistent appellate findings on the same evidentiary record vitiated the conclusion of clandestine removal, because one part of the order accepted correlation between purchase invoices and stock transfer challans as evidence of trading activity, while another part reached the opposite conclusion. The conflicting treatment of the material required fresh consideration by the original authority. The matter was remanded for re-adjudication in accordance with law, with the appellants to be given an opportunity to substantiate their claim and be heard. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 18:21:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109923 Inconsistent appellate findings on the same evidentiary record vitiated the conclusion of clandestine removal, because one part of the order accepted correlation between purchase invoices and stock transfer challans as evidence of trading activity, while another part reached the opposite conclusion. The conflicting treatment of the material required fresh consideration by the original authority. The matter was remanded for re-adjudication in accordance with law, with the appellants to be given an opportunity to substantiate their claim and be heard. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109923