https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219287 An allegation of clandestine removal failed because the record contained no direct, collateral or circumstantial evidence of removal of molasses; the materials only showed loss during storage in the crushing season. On jurisdiction, the dispute was treated as one falling within the revisional mechanism under the statutory scheme, and the Tribunal held that its powers could not be expanded beyond the jurisdiction expressly conferred by law. The appeal was therefore not entertained on merits, and the stay application became infructuous. en-us Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219287 An allegation of clandestine removal failed because the record contained no direct, collateral or circumstantial evidence of removal of molasses; the materials only showed loss during storage in the crushing season. On jurisdiction, the dispute was treated as one falling within the revisional mechanism under the statutory scheme, and the Tribunal held that its powers could not be expanded beyond the jurisdiction expressly conferred by law. The appeal was therefore not entertained on merits, and the stay application became infructuous. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219287