https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396646 The Tribunal set aside the order, finding the demand unjustified due to reliance on presumptions and improper interpretation of evidence. The appellant successfully argued against allegations of clandestine removal, highlighting flaws in stock verification methods and providing credible explanations for discrepancies. The Tribunal emphasized the Revenue's failure to meet the onus of proof, especially regarding the extended limitation period invocation, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant and deeming the demand unsustainable. en-us Mon, 13 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jul 2021 15:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396646 The Tribunal set aside the order, finding the demand unjustified due to reliance on presumptions and improper interpretation of evidence. The appellant successfully argued against allegations of clandestine removal, highlighting flaws in stock verification methods and providing credible explanations for discrepancies. The Tribunal emphasized the Revenue's failure to meet the onus of proof, especially regarding the extended limitation period invocation, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant and deeming the demand unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396646