https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345641 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, recognizing the appellant's use of structural items as capital goods based on evolving judicial interpretations. Criticizing the prolonged litigation and the Department's failure to substantiate allegations, the Tribunal emphasized the undue burden on the appellant to produce decade-old documents. The appeals were allowed with consequential benefits, stressing the necessity for clear and timely substantiation of allegations by the Department. en-us Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jul 2017 06:41:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345641 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, recognizing the appellant's use of structural items as capital goods based on evolving judicial interpretations. Criticizing the prolonged litigation and the Department's failure to substantiate allegations, the Tribunal emphasized the undue burden on the appellant to produce decade-old documents. The appeals were allowed with consequential benefits, stressing the necessity for clear and timely substantiation of allegations by the Department. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345641