https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362378 The case involved the confiscation of goods and imposition of duty, interest, and penalty on appellants for intercepted goods without proper documents. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand and penalties, including personal penalties. The appellants challenged this decision, citing duplication of demand, lack of corroborative evidence, and allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The tribunal found that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had not adequately analyzed the evidence, remanding the case for a thorough examination of the allegations. The appellant was granted a hearing for further review. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:00:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362378 The case involved the confiscation of goods and imposition of duty, interest, and penalty on appellants for intercepted goods without proper documents. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand and penalties, including personal penalties. The appellants challenged this decision, citing duplication of demand, lack of corroborative evidence, and allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The tribunal found that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had not adequately analyzed the evidence, remanding the case for a thorough examination of the allegations. The appellant was granted a hearing for further review. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362378