https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335154 The Tribunal partially allowed Appeal No. 388 of 2008 and fully allowed Appeal Nos. 389 & 390, providing consequential relief to the appellants. The Revenue's claims of clandestine removal of goods without payment of Central Excise duty were not substantiated due to lack of substantial evidence. The Tribunal also set aside the confiscation orders related to raw materials as Rule 25 does not authorize confiscation of raw materials. Statements taken under duress and without proper cross-examination were deemed unreliable by the Tribunal, leading to the dismissal of the demand for Central Excise duty and penalties. en-us Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335154 The Tribunal partially allowed Appeal No. 388 of 2008 and fully allowed Appeal Nos. 389 & 390, providing consequential relief to the appellants. The Revenue's claims of clandestine removal of goods without payment of Central Excise duty were not substantiated due to lack of substantial evidence. The Tribunal also set aside the confiscation orders related to raw materials as Rule 25 does not authorize confiscation of raw materials. Statements taken under duress and without proper cross-examination were deemed unreliable by the Tribunal, leading to the dismissal of the demand for Central Excise duty and penalties. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335154