https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124075 The Tribunal rejected the Department's appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding duty demand and penalty imposition for clandestine removal of goods without payment of duty. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence supporting the estimated gain in production due to the use of anti-static oil, noting the importance of corroborative evidence and thorough analysis in such cases. The decision was based on distinguishing factors from a previous case cited by the Department where private records were relied upon, ultimately upholding the Commissioner's findings due to insufficient evidence. en-us Mon, 03 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:55:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124075 The Tribunal rejected the Department's appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding duty demand and penalty imposition for clandestine removal of goods without payment of duty. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence supporting the estimated gain in production due to the use of anti-static oil, noting the importance of corroborative evidence and thorough analysis in such cases. The decision was based on distinguishing factors from a previous case cited by the Department where private records were relied upon, ultimately upholding the Commissioner's findings due to insufficient evidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124075