https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418916 The Tribunal allowed the appeals in favor of the appellant, who was accused of availing fraudulent CENVAT credit. The appellant successfully demonstrated through voluminous documents, including invoices and gate registers, the legitimate receipt of goods against which the credit was claimed. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of concrete evidence supporting the allegations of clandestine removal, citing the necessity for tangible proof in such cases. Relying on third-party evidence without adequate corroboration was deemed unjustified, leading to the decision to set aside the challenged order and uphold the appellant's right to the CENVAT credit. en-us Fri, 18 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Feb 2022 08:32:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418916 The Tribunal allowed the appeals in favor of the appellant, who was accused of availing fraudulent CENVAT credit. The appellant successfully demonstrated through voluminous documents, including invoices and gate registers, the legitimate receipt of goods against which the credit was claimed. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of concrete evidence supporting the allegations of clandestine removal, citing the necessity for tangible proof in such cases. Relying on third-party evidence without adequate corroboration was deemed unjustified, leading to the decision to set aside the challenged order and uphold the appellant's right to the CENVAT credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418916