https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117935 Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty could not be sustained because clandestine removal and intent to evade duty were not proved by cogent evidence. The Department relied on the absence of a duplicate invoice copy and incomplete RG-I entries, but physical verification showed no excess or shortage of stock, and the explanation regarding invoice copies was not effectively rebutted. The burden remained on the Revenue to establish actual removal of goods, which it failed to discharge. As the goods and truck were not available for confiscation, the redemption fine was also not maintainable, and all adverse orders were set aside. en-us Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:49:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117935 Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty could not be sustained because clandestine removal and intent to evade duty were not proved by cogent evidence. The Department relied on the absence of a duplicate invoice copy and incomplete RG-I entries, but physical verification showed no excess or shortage of stock, and the explanation regarding invoice copies was not effectively rebutted. The burden remained on the Revenue to establish actual removal of goods, which it failed to discharge. As the goods and truck were not available for confiscation, the redemption fine was also not maintainable, and all adverse orders were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117935