https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98085 A duty demand based on private register entries alleging clandestine production and removal was rejected because the entries were uncorroborated, the reasoning depended on presumption rather than proof, and no supporting worker evidence or reliable cross-check established the demand. Confiscation of goods, land and building, and penalties on the assessee and its partners were also held unsustainable because Central Excise confiscation and penalty provisions were not attracted to the levy under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. The duty demand, confiscation, and penalties were set aside. en-us Mon, 20 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:33:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98085 A duty demand based on private register entries alleging clandestine production and removal was rejected because the entries were uncorroborated, the reasoning depended on presumption rather than proof, and no supporting worker evidence or reliable cross-check established the demand. Confiscation of goods, land and building, and penalties on the assessee and its partners were also held unsustainable because Central Excise confiscation and penalty provisions were not attracted to the levy under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. The duty demand, confiscation, and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98085