https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366183 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for payment of central excise duty. The case involved allegations of clandestine clearance of cotton yarn, but the department failed to provide concrete evidence to support the claims. The main documentary evidence, a broker commission file, was disowned by the appellant, and inconsistencies in statements from various individuals raised doubts about their credibility. Procedural lapses, including failure to produce witnesses for cross-examination, further weakened the case against the appellant. As a result, the appeal was allowed due to lack of substantiated evidence and procedural deficiencies. en-us Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:52:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366183 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for payment of central excise duty. The case involved allegations of clandestine clearance of cotton yarn, but the department failed to provide concrete evidence to support the claims. The main documentary evidence, a broker commission file, was disowned by the appellant, and inconsistencies in statements from various individuals raised doubts about their credibility. Procedural lapses, including failure to produce witnesses for cross-examination, further weakened the case against the appellant. As a result, the appeal was allowed due to lack of substantiated evidence and procedural deficiencies. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366183