https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203584 Concurrent factual findings that the seized cash had no proved nexus with clandestine removal of excisable goods were not shown to be perverse. The court noted the absence of corroborative evidence, the absence of a live link between the parties and the cash seizure, and the revenue's failure to prove clandestine removal by evidence rather than suspicion. On that basis, no substantial question of law arose under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the revenue's appeal failed while the finding in favour of the assessee was affirmed. en-us Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203584 Concurrent factual findings that the seized cash had no proved nexus with clandestine removal of excisable goods were not shown to be perverse. The court noted the absence of corroborative evidence, the absence of a live link between the parties and the cash seizure, and the revenue's failure to prove clandestine removal by evidence rather than suspicion. On that basis, no substantial question of law arose under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the revenue's appeal failed while the finding in favour of the assessee was affirmed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203584