https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172718 The Tribunal found that the statement recorded under section 14 of the Central Excise Act was not reliable and lacked corroboration, leading to the conclusion that the initial burden of proving allegations of clandestine activities was not met by the Department. The evidence related to manufacturing and dealer involvement did not support the claims, and the Department failed to establish the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the case, stating that no legal question was at issue in the decision. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:44:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172718 The Tribunal found that the statement recorded under section 14 of the Central Excise Act was not reliable and lacked corroboration, leading to the conclusion that the initial burden of proving allegations of clandestine activities was not met by the Department. The evidence related to manufacturing and dealer involvement did not support the claims, and the Department failed to establish the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the case, stating that no legal question was at issue in the decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172718