https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98723 The case involved a discrepancy in stock of intermediate goods where the authorised signatory admitted a shortage of H.R. Coils. However, the confession did not extend to knowledge of goods being sent out without duty payment. The court found the lower authorities erred in converting a possibility into a confession without sufficient evidence of clandestine production. Relevant case laws were cited to emphasize the necessity of direct admission for establishing clandestine removal. The appeal was allowed, and the previous decision was overturned, providing relief to the party. en-us Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:33:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98723 The case involved a discrepancy in stock of intermediate goods where the authorised signatory admitted a shortage of H.R. Coils. However, the confession did not extend to knowledge of goods being sent out without duty payment. The court found the lower authorities erred in converting a possibility into a confession without sufficient evidence of clandestine production. Relevant case laws were cited to emphasize the necessity of direct admission for establishing clandestine removal. The appeal was allowed, and the previous decision was overturned, providing relief to the party. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98723