https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115150 The Revenue's appeal against the dropping of a demand under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act by the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad, was rejected by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence of duty collection as required by law, as no invoices indicated excise duty separately and no concrete proof of duty collection existed. The decision underscores the necessity of providing clear evidence of duty collection to support demands under Section 11D, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and invoicing practices. en-us Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 May 2012 12:44:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115150 The Revenue's appeal against the dropping of a demand under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act by the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad, was rejected by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence of duty collection as required by law, as no invoices indicated excise duty separately and no concrete proof of duty collection existed. The decision underscores the necessity of providing clear evidence of duty collection to support demands under Section 11D, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and invoicing practices. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115150