https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356466 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand for duty and associated penalties due to insufficient evidence supporting allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the evidence presented by the Revenue, emphasizing the lack of corroborative evidence and failure to establish evasion conclusively. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected, and all three appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellants. en-us Mon, 22 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Mar 2018 08:00:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356466 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand for duty and associated penalties due to insufficient evidence supporting allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the evidence presented by the Revenue, emphasizing the lack of corroborative evidence and failure to establish evasion conclusively. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected, and all three appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356466