https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119213 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the necessity for the Revenue to provide substantial evidence beyond mere Balance Sheet comparisons to establish clandestine removal of goods. The judgment highlighted the burden of proof on the Revenue and the insufficiency of discrepancies in financial records alone to prove clandestine activities. Lack of concrete evidence regarding manufacturing and clearance without duty payment led to the dismissal of the case, emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive investigation in duty evasion cases. en-us Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jul 2012 17:25:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119213 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the necessity for the Revenue to provide substantial evidence beyond mere Balance Sheet comparisons to establish clandestine removal of goods. The judgment highlighted the burden of proof on the Revenue and the insufficiency of discrepancies in financial records alone to prove clandestine activities. Lack of concrete evidence regarding manufacturing and clearance without duty payment led to the dismissal of the case, emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive investigation in duty evasion cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119213