https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115117 In clandestine removal disputes, incriminating seized documents, shortages in finished goods and inputs, and an un-retracted partner's statement can together establish unaccounted clearance of excisable goods. Direct proof is not indispensable where surrounding circumstances consistently point to removal, and documents recovered from the premises may be treated as reliable absent contrary evidence. A defence that the papers reflected only sauda or brokerage entries was rejected as an afterthought, especially where broker commission correspondence supported completed transactions. Minor ledger discrepancies were held insufficient to rebut the inference drawn from the overall evidence, and the duty demand and penalties were sustained. en-us Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2024 16:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115117 In clandestine removal disputes, incriminating seized documents, shortages in finished goods and inputs, and an un-retracted partner's statement can together establish unaccounted clearance of excisable goods. Direct proof is not indispensable where surrounding circumstances consistently point to removal, and documents recovered from the premises may be treated as reliable absent contrary evidence. A defence that the papers reflected only sauda or brokerage entries was rejected as an afterthought, especially where broker commission correspondence supported completed transactions. Minor ledger discrepancies were held insufficient to rebut the inference drawn from the overall evidence, and the duty demand and penalties were sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115117