https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375305 The manufacturing company was accused of evading Central Excise duty through clandestine removal and under-valuation. Despite the show cause notice and investigations by the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, the adjudicating authority found insufficient evidence to support the allegations. The authority ruled in favor of the company, citing lack of proof of willful suppression and barred the demand based on limitation. The Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the absence of material evidence and logistics details, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeal. en-us Mon, 28 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Feb 2019 06:33:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375305 The manufacturing company was accused of evading Central Excise duty through clandestine removal and under-valuation. Despite the show cause notice and investigations by the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, the adjudicating authority found insufficient evidence to support the allegations. The authority ruled in favor of the company, citing lack of proof of willful suppression and barred the demand based on limitation. The Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the absence of material evidence and logistics details, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375305