https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80378 Duty demands based solely on a private register and departmental test results could not be sustained where the sample testing did not support the alleged mis-declaration of yarn counts and no contrary material existed. Allegations of suppression of production and clandestine removal also failed because the comparison of private and statutory records, without seizure of unaccounted goods, evidence of excess raw material, sale records, or other corroboration, was insufficient to prove undisclosed clearances. As the substantive charges failed, the penalty also could not survive and was set aside, leaving the assessee with complete relief. en-us Mon, 23 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:49:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80378 Duty demands based solely on a private register and departmental test results could not be sustained where the sample testing did not support the alleged mis-declaration of yarn counts and no contrary material existed. Allegations of suppression of production and clandestine removal also failed because the comparison of private and statutory records, without seizure of unaccounted goods, evidence of excess raw material, sale records, or other corroboration, was insufficient to prove undisclosed clearances. As the substantive charges failed, the penalty also could not survive and was set aside, leaving the assessee with complete relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80378