https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236622 In departmental excise adjudication, confiscation was sustained where 49.960 kgs. of branded chewing tobacco was found in excess of the recorded balance and remained unaccounted in statutory records. Duty demand, interest and penalty were also upheld because seized private records, loose sheets and corroborative statements indicated clandestine removal without payment of duty, and the statements were not retracted. The note reiterates that such allegations may be proved on the standard of preponderance of probability, with unrebutted documentary evidence and admissions sufficient to support adverse findings in excise proceedings. en-us Thu, 08 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:30:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236622 In departmental excise adjudication, confiscation was sustained where 49.960 kgs. of branded chewing tobacco was found in excess of the recorded balance and remained unaccounted in statutory records. Duty demand, interest and penalty were also upheld because seized private records, loose sheets and corroborative statements indicated clandestine removal without payment of duty, and the statements were not retracted. The note reiterates that such allegations may be proved on the standard of preponderance of probability, with unrebutted documentary evidence and admissions sufficient to support adverse findings in excise proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236622