https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363018 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the demand of Central Excise Duty and penalties imposed on the appellant's director. The decision emphasized the lack of substantial evidence beyond third-party diary entries and statements, highlighting the necessity of corroborative evidence in cases of clandestine removal of goods. Previous tribunal decisions were cited to support the stance that demands cannot solely rely on third-party documents without additional evidence. The judgment underscored the importance of clinching evidence in upholding demands related to clandestine activities. en-us Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Jul 2018 06:44:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363018 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the demand of Central Excise Duty and penalties imposed on the appellant's director. The decision emphasized the lack of substantial evidence beyond third-party diary entries and statements, highlighting the necessity of corroborative evidence in cases of clandestine removal of goods. Previous tribunal decisions were cited to support the stance that demands cannot solely rely on third-party documents without additional evidence. The judgment underscored the importance of clinching evidence in upholding demands related to clandestine activities. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363018