https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367835 The tribunal set aside the demand of Rs. 57,81,475/- against M/s AO for alleged misuse of exemption Notification No. 50/2003-CE, citing lack of evidence. The tribunal also ruled in favor of M/s AO regarding the fraudulent availment of CENVAT credit, as allegations were unsupported by corroborative evidence. Additionally, the charge of undervaluation of goods to M/s AI was dismissed since Rule 9 did not apply. The appeals were allowed, and the tribunal emphasized the insufficiency of evidence to substantiate the charges. en-us Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Nov 2019 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367835 The tribunal set aside the demand of Rs. 57,81,475/- against M/s AO for alleged misuse of exemption Notification No. 50/2003-CE, citing lack of evidence. The tribunal also ruled in favor of M/s AO regarding the fraudulent availment of CENVAT credit, as allegations were unsupported by corroborative evidence. Additionally, the charge of undervaluation of goods to M/s AI was dismissed since Rule 9 did not apply. The appeals were allowed, and the tribunal emphasized the insufficiency of evidence to substantiate the charges. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367835