https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211195 The appeals were dismissed on merit due to the appellant's failure to substantiate claims regarding the receipt and usage of goods, as well as the unsuitability of CBFS as a furnace oil substitute. Despite the appellant's payment of duty before the show cause notice, the imposition of penalty was upheld, with a reduction to 25% of the duty payable granted based on legal precedents. The appellant's arguments were rejected for lack of evidence and failure to address technical aspects, resulting in the sustainability of the adjudication against them. en-us Tue, 13 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2015 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211195 The appeals were dismissed on merit due to the appellant's failure to substantiate claims regarding the receipt and usage of goods, as well as the unsuitability of CBFS as a furnace oil substitute. Despite the appellant's payment of duty before the show cause notice, the imposition of penalty was upheld, with a reduction to 25% of the duty payable granted based on legal precedents. The appellant's arguments were rejected for lack of evidence and failure to address technical aspects, resulting in the sustainability of the adjudication against them. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211195