https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243408 The Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the confiscation of aluminum alloy ingots valued at Rs. 42.58 lakhs, citing lack of evidence indicating intent to evade duty. The penalty imposed under Rule 25 was overturned due to insufficient proof of clandestine removal, with a reduced penalty of Rs. 5,000 imposed under Rule 27 for a different violation. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of evidence in proving intent for clandestine removal and stressed the significance of accurate record-keeping in excise cases. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 12:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243408 The Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the confiscation of aluminum alloy ingots valued at Rs. 42.58 lakhs, citing lack of evidence indicating intent to evade duty. The penalty imposed under Rule 25 was overturned due to insufficient proof of clandestine removal, with a reduced penalty of Rs. 5,000 imposed under Rule 27 for a different violation. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of evidence in proving intent for clandestine removal and stressed the significance of accurate record-keeping in excise cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243408