https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392240 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the confiscation of seized goods and penalty imposed. It found the lack of chemical examination reports and inadmissibility of un-cross-examined statements undermined the allegation of manufacturing without registration. Market opinions were deemed insufficient without scientific analysis, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence. The Tribunal highlighted the necessity of chemical examination to determine the nature of seized goods and held that un-cross-examined statements were inadmissible evidence, following a precedent from the Allahabad High Court. en-us Wed, 04 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Feb 2020 09:05:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392240 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the confiscation of seized goods and penalty imposed. It found the lack of chemical examination reports and inadmissibility of un-cross-examined statements undermined the allegation of manufacturing without registration. Market opinions were deemed insufficient without scientific analysis, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence. The Tribunal highlighted the necessity of chemical examination to determine the nature of seized goods and held that un-cross-examined statements were inadmissible evidence, following a precedent from the Allahabad High Court. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392240