https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201390 Recovered delivery challans showing goods, consignee details and transport particulars, together with the director's un-retracted admission, were treated as sufficient evidence of clandestine removal. The department was not required to conduct further investigation, and the burden shifted to the assessee to rebut the evidence; as it failed to do so, the demand and penalty on the company were sustained. Penalty on the director under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was also upheld because he was present at recovery, admitted his role, and separate penalty on the company did not bar personal penalty where participation in the offence was shown. en-us Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jan 2011 14:23:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201390 Recovered delivery challans showing goods, consignee details and transport particulars, together with the director's un-retracted admission, were treated as sufficient evidence of clandestine removal. The department was not required to conduct further investigation, and the burden shifted to the assessee to rebut the evidence; as it failed to do so, the demand and penalty on the company were sustained. Penalty on the director under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was also upheld because he was present at recovery, admitted his role, and separate penalty on the company did not bar personal penalty where participation in the offence was shown. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201390