https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111618 Unaccounted excess stock of toilet soap found in the factory remained liable to confiscation where the respondent's explanation did not account for the entire seized quantity. Even accepting the claimed production report for 16-11-1994, it explained only 1476 boxes out of 5418 seized boxes, leaving a substantial unexplained balance. The document relied on before the appellate authority was treated as fabricated and inconsistent with the respondent's own admission of actual production, so the order-in-appeal rested on incorrect facts and an unverified record. The confiscation and consequential adjudication action were therefore upheld, and the respondent's challenge failed. en-us Tue, 13 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:16:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111618 Unaccounted excess stock of toilet soap found in the factory remained liable to confiscation where the respondent's explanation did not account for the entire seized quantity. Even accepting the claimed production report for 16-11-1994, it explained only 1476 boxes out of 5418 seized boxes, leaving a substantial unexplained balance. The document relied on before the appellate authority was treated as fabricated and inconsistent with the respondent's own admission of actual production, so the order-in-appeal rested on incorrect facts and an unverified record. The confiscation and consequential adjudication action were therefore upheld, and the respondent's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111618