https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360848 The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside due to insufficient evidence supporting the demand of Central Excise duty for clandestine removal of M.S. Ingots. The judgment emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and highlighted that relying solely on third-party records is insufficient to establish such demands. The penalty imposed on the director was also set aside based on the legal position and factual circumstances of the case. en-us Wed, 23 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 May 2018 07:06:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360848 The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside due to insufficient evidence supporting the demand of Central Excise duty for clandestine removal of M.S. Ingots. The judgment emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and highlighted that relying solely on third-party records is insufficient to establish such demands. The penalty imposed on the director was also set aside based on the legal position and factual circumstances of the case. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360848