https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124765 The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, confirming a demand of Rs. 2,42,633 against the appellants for not producing a re-warehousing certificate within the specified time frame. The appellant's evidence was deemed insufficient, with discrepancies in seized documents raising doubts. Legal obligations for both supplier and receiver were emphasized, with the Tribunal stressing the requirement for concrete evidence. The appellant's waiver of pre-deposit based on financial hardship was partially granted, with a directive to deposit Rs. 1.5 lakhs within a specified timeframe, pending appeal compliance. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Oct 2012 14:16:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124765 The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, confirming a demand of Rs. 2,42,633 against the appellants for not producing a re-warehousing certificate within the specified time frame. The appellant's evidence was deemed insufficient, with discrepancies in seized documents raising doubts. Legal obligations for both supplier and receiver were emphasized, with the Tribunal stressing the requirement for concrete evidence. The appellant's waiver of pre-deposit based on financial hardship was partially granted, with a directive to deposit Rs. 1.5 lakhs within a specified timeframe, pending appeal compliance. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124765