https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114330 Seized private production and lot registers, corroborated by statements from persons connected with manufacture and delivery, were treated as reliable evidence of clandestine removal of man-made fabrics because they covered the relevant period, did not match statutory records, and remained unexplained. On that basis, the additional excise duty demand was sustained. Confiscation and penalties were, however, set aside because the penal provisions of the Central Excise Act and Rules were not applicable at the material time to proceedings under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957, leaving only the duty liability intact. en-us Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 May 2012 17:39:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114330 Seized private production and lot registers, corroborated by statements from persons connected with manufacture and delivery, were treated as reliable evidence of clandestine removal of man-made fabrics because they covered the relevant period, did not match statutory records, and remained unexplained. On that basis, the additional excise duty demand was sustained. Confiscation and penalties were, however, set aside because the penal provisions of the Central Excise Act and Rules were not applicable at the material time to proceedings under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957, leaving only the duty liability intact. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114330