https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259111 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand of Rs. 57,51,000 against RPPL, as the evidence provided by the Department was insufficient to prove duty evasion. The confiscation of cash from the residences of individuals was also not upheld, as the Department failed to demonstrate that the cash represented proceeds from illicit Gutkha sales. Additionally, the penalties imposed on individuals under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules were deemed unjustified due to lack of evidence linking them to excisable goods liable for confiscation. Consequently, the duty demand against RPPL and the penalties on the individuals were overturned, and the appeals were allowed. en-us Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Aug 2015 13:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259111 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand of Rs. 57,51,000 against RPPL, as the evidence provided by the Department was insufficient to prove duty evasion. The confiscation of cash from the residences of individuals was also not upheld, as the Department failed to demonstrate that the cash represented proceeds from illicit Gutkha sales. Additionally, the penalties imposed on individuals under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules were deemed unjustified due to lack of evidence linking them to excisable goods liable for confiscation. Consequently, the duty demand against RPPL and the penalties on the individuals were overturned, and the appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259111