https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377394 A de novo excise adjudication was found unsustainable because it did not follow the Tribunal's remand directions, which had confined reconsideration to whether cavity sheets were removed as upholstery sheets. The order instead relied substantially on the original findings, used disputed production and clearance figures despite record gaps, and failed to explain the basis of the annexures. It also repeated conclusions earlier set aside and applied a preponderance standard without cogent supporting evidence. On that basis, the impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Mon, 31 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Mar 2019 06:24:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377394 A de novo excise adjudication was found unsustainable because it did not follow the Tribunal's remand directions, which had confined reconsideration to whether cavity sheets were removed as upholstery sheets. The order instead relied substantially on the original findings, used disputed production and clearance figures despite record gaps, and failed to explain the basis of the annexures. It also repeated conclusions earlier set aside and applied a preponderance standard without cogent supporting evidence. On that basis, the impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377394