https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117339 Belated and unexplained retraction of an inculpatory statement may be ignored, and the statement can support a finding of clandestine removal where goods were cleared without invoice and without duty. On that basis, the duty demand and confiscation of the goods were sustained. However, a penalty under Rule 173Q could not be newly imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) when the original authority had not levied it and the Department had not challenged that omission, so the penalty on the company was set aside. Confiscation of the vehicle was also set aside and remanded because the order was passed before the connected goods appeal was decided, indicating non-application of mind. en-us Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:21:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117339 Belated and unexplained retraction of an inculpatory statement may be ignored, and the statement can support a finding of clandestine removal where goods were cleared without invoice and without duty. On that basis, the duty demand and confiscation of the goods were sustained. However, a penalty under Rule 173Q could not be newly imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) when the original authority had not levied it and the Department had not challenged that omission, so the penalty on the company was set aside. Confiscation of the vehicle was also set aside and remanded because the order was passed before the connected goods appeal was decided, indicating non-application of mind. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117339