https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401392 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order was set aside due to insufficient evidence to establish clandestine removal of goods by the appellant. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory provisions for the admissibility of evidence and the necessity of corroborative evidence to support oral statements. The judgment underscored the lack of conclusive proof, especially considering the negation of statements during cross-examination and the absence of sufficient corroborative evidence, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant. en-us Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2020 09:41:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401392 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order was set aside due to insufficient evidence to establish clandestine removal of goods by the appellant. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory provisions for the admissibility of evidence and the necessity of corroborative evidence to support oral statements. The judgment underscored the lack of conclusive proof, especially considering the negation of statements during cross-examination and the absence of sufficient corroborative evidence, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401392