https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344147 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order demanding central excise duty was set aside. The court found that the Revenue failed to substantiate allegations of clandestine activities with credible evidence. Issues such as the relevance of seized Indian currency, capacity of the main appellant, reliance on hand-written slips without proper identification, and procedural non-compliance under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act were crucial in the judgment. The lack of legally tenable and admissible evidence supporting the revenue's claims led to the decision, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance and reliable evidentiary support in excise duty cases. en-us Wed, 17 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:38:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344147 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order demanding central excise duty was set aside. The court found that the Revenue failed to substantiate allegations of clandestine activities with credible evidence. Issues such as the relevance of seized Indian currency, capacity of the main appellant, reliance on hand-written slips without proper identification, and procedural non-compliance under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act were crucial in the judgment. The lack of legally tenable and admissible evidence supporting the revenue's claims led to the decision, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance and reliable evidentiary support in excise duty cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344147