https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351508 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand of Rs. 85,51,258 against the appellant for alleged clandestine removal of goods, based solely on third-party documents. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of corroborative evidence from the appellant, insufficient evidence from transporters, and the denial of the appellant's right to cross-examine witnesses. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal stressed the necessity of thorough investigations and tangible evidence to support such serious allegations. The appeals were allowed, highlighting the importance of establishing charges on a preponderance of probability in quasi-judicial proceedings. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Nov 2017 07:48:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351508 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand of Rs. 85,51,258 against the appellant for alleged clandestine removal of goods, based solely on third-party documents. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of corroborative evidence from the appellant, insufficient evidence from transporters, and the denial of the appellant's right to cross-examine witnesses. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal stressed the necessity of thorough investigations and tangible evidence to support such serious allegations. The appeals were allowed, highlighting the importance of establishing charges on a preponderance of probability in quasi-judicial proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351508