https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236808 Contemporaneous documentary evidence prevailed over untested oral statements in determining the timing of clearance of 80,000 polycarbonate bottles; the records supported clearance in March 1998 when the goods were exempt, so the contrary duty demand was set aside. On the separate allegation of fresh clearances shown as repairs under Rule 173H, the underlying documents and accounting material were not examined in sufficient detail, so the demand and connected penalties were remanded for fresh adjudication. Penalty liability was treated as dependent on the outcome of the substantive demand. en-us Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:07:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236808 Contemporaneous documentary evidence prevailed over untested oral statements in determining the timing of clearance of 80,000 polycarbonate bottles; the records supported clearance in March 1998 when the goods were exempt, so the contrary duty demand was set aside. On the separate allegation of fresh clearances shown as repairs under Rule 173H, the underlying documents and accounting material were not examined in sufficient detail, so the demand and connected penalties were remanded for fresh adjudication. Penalty liability was treated as dependent on the outcome of the substantive demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236808