https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=834 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal that alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of goods without duty payment. It emphasized that discrepancies in financial records alone are insufficient to prove clandestine activities, placing the burden of proof on the Revenue to provide concrete evidence. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, highlighting the lack of evidence supporting the JCDR's claims and stressing the necessity of thorough investigation to establish allegations of clandestine activities. en-us Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=834 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal that alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of goods without duty payment. It emphasized that discrepancies in financial records alone are insufficient to prove clandestine activities, placing the burden of proof on the Revenue to provide concrete evidence. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, highlighting the lack of evidence supporting the JCDR's claims and stressing the necessity of thorough investigation to establish allegations of clandestine activities. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=834