https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408781 Criminal prosecution for alleged clandestine removal and excise duty evasion was held unsustainable where the same allegations had been rejected on merits in departmental adjudication. The appellate authority found no evidence that the transported goods were substitute goods and concluded that the finding of clandestine removal was unsupported; that order attained finality after the departmental challenge was withdrawn. Applying the higher criminal standard of proof and the principle against continuing proceedings on an identical factual foundation already conclusively negatived, the Court treated the prosecution as an abuse of process and quashed the proceedings. en-us Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:35:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408781 Criminal prosecution for alleged clandestine removal and excise duty evasion was held unsustainable where the same allegations had been rejected on merits in departmental adjudication. The appellate authority found no evidence that the transported goods were substitute goods and concluded that the finding of clandestine removal was unsupported; that order attained finality after the departmental challenge was withdrawn. Applying the higher criminal standard of proof and the principle against continuing proceedings on an identical factual foundation already conclusively negatived, the Court treated the prosecution as an abuse of process and quashed the proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408781