https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45645 In an appeal against acquittal in a Central Excise prosecution, interference is warranted only if the trial court's view is perverse or against the weight of evidence; where two reasonable views are possible, the acquittal stands. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and alleged duplication of serial numbers on match bundles, but the evidence did not prove that the seized goods and earlier bundles were from the same accounting period, and the yearly restart of serial numbers allowed an innocent explanation. The absence of a gate pass alone did not establish unlawful removal or duty evasion. The acquittal was therefore not disturbed and the appeals failed. en-us Thu, 09 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:28:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45645 In an appeal against acquittal in a Central Excise prosecution, interference is warranted only if the trial court's view is perverse or against the weight of evidence; where two reasonable views are possible, the acquittal stands. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and alleged duplication of serial numbers on match bundles, but the evidence did not prove that the seized goods and earlier bundles were from the same accounting period, and the yearly restart of serial numbers allowed an innocent explanation. The absence of a gate pass alone did not establish unlawful removal or duty evasion. The acquittal was therefore not disturbed and the appeals failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45645