https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418201 The High Court condoned a delay of 1031 days in filing the appeal, emphasizing the need to consider questions of law under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The revenue raised legal issues concerning excise duty evasion allegations, which the Tribunal dismissed based on factual submissions and lack of conclusive evidence. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, highlighting deficiencies in the appellant's case and endorsing the findings regarding ownership disputes and lack of proof for the excise duty demand. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court emphasizing the importance of factual evidence over discrepancies in statements. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418201 The High Court condoned a delay of 1031 days in filing the appeal, emphasizing the need to consider questions of law under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The revenue raised legal issues concerning excise duty evasion allegations, which the Tribunal dismissed based on factual submissions and lack of conclusive evidence. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, highlighting deficiencies in the appellant's case and endorsing the findings regarding ownership disputes and lack of proof for the excise duty demand. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court emphasizing the importance of factual evidence over discrepancies in statements. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418201