https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308594 The Tribunal set aside the demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty against the appellant for alleged clandestine removal of goods. It found that discrepancies in financial records alone were insufficient to prove evasion without concrete evidence of clandestine activities. Emphasizing the need for thorough investigations and corroborative evidence, the Tribunal ruled that the demand based on variations in audit reports and filings was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, highlighting the importance of substantiating allegations with concrete evidence before confirming duty evasion charges. en-us Mon, 04 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jul 2023 21:56:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308594 The Tribunal set aside the demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty against the appellant for alleged clandestine removal of goods. It found that discrepancies in financial records alone were insufficient to prove evasion without concrete evidence of clandestine activities. Emphasizing the need for thorough investigations and corroborative evidence, the Tribunal ruled that the demand based on variations in audit reports and filings was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, highlighting the importance of substantiating allegations with concrete evidence before confirming duty evasion charges. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308594