https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119172 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, highlighting the insufficiency of evidence to support the imposed duty and penalties. The decision emphasized that demands based solely on visual examination without additional corroborating evidence could not be sustained. Additionally, the Tribunal held that the limitation period for issuing the show cause notice was not curtailed by the department's knowledge alone, aligning with the precedent set by the Nizam Sugar Factory case. As a result, the appeal was allowed on merits alone, providing consequential relief to the appellant. en-us Thu, 04 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:23:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119172 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, highlighting the insufficiency of evidence to support the imposed duty and penalties. The decision emphasized that demands based solely on visual examination without additional corroborating evidence could not be sustained. Additionally, the Tribunal held that the limitation period for issuing the show cause notice was not curtailed by the department's knowledge alone, aligning with the precedent set by the Nizam Sugar Factory case. As a result, the appeal was allowed on merits alone, providing consequential relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119172