https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388181 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling that the department failed to sufficiently prove allegations of clandestine removal and shortages of raw materials. The Tribunal criticized the reliance on non-admissible third-party evidence and disregarded the appellant's documentary evidence. As a result, the impugned demand of Rs. 13,74,436/- and the penalty were set aside, and the appeals were allowed. en-us Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2019 09:28:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388181 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling that the department failed to sufficiently prove allegations of clandestine removal and shortages of raw materials. The Tribunal criticized the reliance on non-admissible third-party evidence and disregarded the appellant's documentary evidence. As a result, the impugned demand of Rs. 13,74,436/- and the penalty were set aside, and the appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388181