https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388533 The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove that the appellants availed irregular and fraudulent Cenvat credit based on invoices without actual receipt of goods. Due to flaws in the investigation, lack of incriminating evidence, and inconsistencies in witness statements, the allegations were not substantiated. Consequently, penalties under Rule 25(1)(d) and 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were not imposed on the appellants. The Tribunal set aside the initial order and granted consequential relief to the appellants. en-us Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:34:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388533 The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove that the appellants availed irregular and fraudulent Cenvat credit based on invoices without actual receipt of goods. Due to flaws in the investigation, lack of incriminating evidence, and inconsistencies in witness statements, the allegations were not substantiated. Consequently, penalties under Rule 25(1)(d) and 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were not imposed on the appellants. The Tribunal set aside the initial order and granted consequential relief to the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388533