https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93935 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order, and held that the appellant did not engage in clandestine removal of finished goods. The Tribunal found documentary and testimonial evidence established that consignments sent to the appellant's in-house facility were testing samples for process familiarisation and analytical development, not dutiable finished products, and observed the revenue produced no contrary evidence. Discrepancies in weights recorded by courier invoices were attributed to billing weight slabs and did not prove excess quantities. Further, re-availment of previously reversed CENVAT credit upon withdrawal of refund claims was held permissible; Rule 4 of the 2004 Credit Rules did not preclude such re-credit. Appeal allowed. en-us Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:28 +0530 Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93935 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order, and held that the appellant did not engage in clandestine removal of finished goods. The Tribunal found documentary and testimonial evidence established that consignments sent to the appellant's in-house facility were testing samples for process familiarisation and analytical development, not dutiable finished products, and observed the revenue produced no contrary evidence. Discrepancies in weights recorded by courier invoices were attributed to billing weight slabs and did not prove excess quantities. Further, re-availment of previously reversed CENVAT credit upon withdrawal of refund claims was held permissible; Rule 4 of the 2004 Credit Rules did not preclude such re-credit. Appeal allowed. Highlights Central Excise Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:28 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93935