https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326429 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal due to insufficient evidence supporting the demand based on the assumption of Mill Scale Scrap/loss falling within 1 to 3%. The Respondent's evidence demonstrated a decrease in losses after modifications, and the absence of contrary evidence indicated no clandestine diversion. The Tribunal emphasized that clandestine removal cannot be established on assumptions alone, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The lack of positive evidence on clandestine removal rendered the Revenue's appeal unsustainable on merits. en-us Fri, 01 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326429 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal due to insufficient evidence supporting the demand based on the assumption of Mill Scale Scrap/loss falling within 1 to 3%. The Respondent's evidence demonstrated a decrease in losses after modifications, and the absence of contrary evidence indicated no clandestine diversion. The Tribunal emphasized that clandestine removal cannot be established on assumptions alone, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The lack of positive evidence on clandestine removal rendered the Revenue's appeal unsustainable on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326429