Clandestine removal demands clear corroboration, and confiscation fails without specific notice proposing that relief.

Allegations of clandestine removal require clear, corroborative evidence linking shortages, register entries, transport records and statements to duty-evaded goods; the material here was found insufficient because the purity register alone did not establish removal at the duty-paying stage, purchaser verification was absent, stock-taking was disputed, and duty-paid documents were not properly co-related. The demand of duty and enhanced penalty were therefore not proved on the available record. Confiscation also could not be ordered because the show cause notice did not specifically propose that relief for the alleged goods.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of duty and imposition of penalty for alleged clandestine removal were sustainable, and whether confiscation of goods could be ordered in the absence of a specific notice and seizure.

Analysis: The demand was founded on shortages, purity register entries, transport vouchers, and statements of the company's director and employees. The record showed, however, that the adjudicating authority had examined the reply, the cross-examination of departmental witnesses, and the documentary material, and had found that the purity register entries did not by themselves establish removal of goods at the duty-paying stage. The absence of inquiry with purchasers, the lack of co-relation between the registers and duty-paid documents, the disputed nature of stock taking, and the absence of clear corroboration weakened the department's case. The confiscation prayer also could not be sustained because the notice did not specifically propose confiscation of the alleged goods.

Conclusion: The demand of duty and higher penalty were not proved on the available material, and confiscation could not be ordered. The respondent succeeded on the merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Allegations of clandestine removal must be supported by clear and corroborative evidence, and confiscation cannot be sustained without a specific notice proposing such relief.

---