Invoice branding not enough calcutta hc
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The conduct anterior to the levy may give rise to suspicion but it cannot, by itself, discharge the burden of proving that the goods actually removed after 1st March 2003 bore a brand name. Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof.

Refund of amount deposited during investigation
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

CESTAT further held that amount deposited by assessee during investigation could not be retained after demand of excise was set aside.

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: In the appeal against the order of the High Court where it refused to issue mandamus to the Central Government