Cumulative evidence can prove clandestine removal when private records, admissions, and excess material procurement all point the same way.

Cumulative documentary evidence can sustain a finding of clandestine manufacture and removal where private packing and labour records, admissions by directors and employees, verified excess procurement of raw materials, a project report indicating higher production capacity and working hours, and excess electricity consumption are read together. Electricity data may be only corroborative and need not by itself prove clandestine clearance. The operative point is that individual indicators may be insufficient in isolation, but their combined effect can support confirmation of duty, interest and penalty where the material consistently points to unrecorded production and removal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of central excise duty, interest and penalty for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of polypropylene glasses was sustainable on the basis of private records, labour contractor records, statements of directors and employees, raw material verification, project report and electricity consumption.

Analysis: The demand was founded primarily on private packing and labour records, which were corroborated by statements admitting packing payments, verification of excess procurement of raw materials, the project report showing higher production capacity and higher working hours, and excess electricity consumption. The electricity evidence was treated only as corroborative and not as the sole basis. The Tribunal held that while individual pieces of evidence such as electricity consumption or project report may not by themselves establish clandestine clearance, their cumulative effect, together with admissions and unrecorded material procurement, was sufficient to sustain the finding of clandestine manufacture and removal.

Conclusion: The finding of clandestine removal was upheld and the challenge to the duty and penalty confirmation failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was sustained, and the appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Clandestine manufacture and removal may be sustained on the cumulative effect of corroborative documentary evidence, admissions, and verified excess procurement, even where some individual indicators are not independently conclusive.

---