https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329699 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order for recovery of proportionate input credit due to alleged excessive losses during repacking. The Tribunal found no evidence of deliberate evasion or misuse of credit, emphasizing the lack of substantial proof linking the losses to unauthorized activities. Refuting Revenue's claims of diversion without concrete evidence, the Tribunal highlighted the necessity for credible proof to support allegations of breach of law. Citing precedent, the Tribunal underscored the indefeasible nature of CENVAT credit and the requirement for direct evidence to justify disallowance, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. en-us Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jan 2017 18:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329699 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order for recovery of proportionate input credit due to alleged excessive losses during repacking. The Tribunal found no evidence of deliberate evasion or misuse of credit, emphasizing the lack of substantial proof linking the losses to unauthorized activities. Refuting Revenue's claims of diversion without concrete evidence, the Tribunal highlighted the necessity for credible proof to support allegations of breach of law. Citing precedent, the Tribunal underscored the indefeasible nature of CENVAT credit and the requirement for direct evidence to justify disallowance, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329699