https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242196 The appellant faced a demand for excise duty on scrap of capital goods based on the alleged availing of Cenvat credit. The Tribunal found a lack of evidence to support this claim and emphasized the department's burden of proof. Citing a similar precedent, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stressing the importance of substantiating claims with concrete evidence. The decision underscores the necessity for the department to establish claims such as Cenvat credit availed through sufficient evidence to support their demands effectively. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242196 The appellant faced a demand for excise duty on scrap of capital goods based on the alleged availing of Cenvat credit. The Tribunal found a lack of evidence to support this claim and emphasized the department's burden of proof. Citing a similar precedent, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stressing the importance of substantiating claims with concrete evidence. The decision underscores the necessity for the department to establish claims such as Cenvat credit availed through sufficient evidence to support their demands effectively. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242196