https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278297 The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to establish the charge of clandestine removal despite producing evidence, as the respondent denied the allegations and raised doubts on the reliability of the evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborating evidence beyond entries in a register, questioning the lack of further verification from buyers. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal in favor of the Revenue, dismissing the appeal due to the absence of a substantial question of law. en-us Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:11:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278297 The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to establish the charge of clandestine removal despite producing evidence, as the respondent denied the allegations and raised doubts on the reliability of the evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborating evidence beyond entries in a register, questioning the lack of further verification from buyers. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal in favor of the Revenue, dismissing the appeal due to the absence of a substantial question of law. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278297