Uncorroborated confessional statement cannot alone sustain excise penalty or duty demand without independent supporting evidence.

Penalty and duty liability under excise law cannot be sustained solely on an uncorroborated confessional statement attributed to a third party. Where the alleged misdeclaration of quantity and duty evasion was supported by no independent material, the Tribunal was entitled to treat the statement as insufficient to fasten liability. The absence of corroborative evidence, including the appellant's own acceptance of that gap, made the Tribunal's view reasonable and plausible on the facts. The order setting aside the penalty and related findings was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty and duty liability could be sustained on the basis of an uncorroborated confessional statement attributed to a third party, and whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the orders below on that ground.

Analysis: The orders of the lower authorities were founded principally on the confessional statement of the person said to be in charge of the assessee's business. No independent material was shown to corroborate the alleged misdeclaration of quantity or evasion of duty. In these circumstances, the Tribunal's view that the statement by itself was insufficient to fasten liability was found to be a reasonable and plausible view on the facts. The absence of corroborative evidence was accepted even by the appellant before the Court.

Conclusion: The impugned order setting aside the penalty and related findings was upheld, and the issue was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty or duty demand under the excise law cannot be sustained solely on an uncorroborated confessional statement when no independent evidence supports the allegation.

---