https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244669 Duty demands based on admitted stock shortage and seized cotton fabrics were sustained because the shortage, seizure, related statements, and prior payment of duty provided sufficient circumstantial evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal. The remaining demands based on private records, alleged manufacture of man-made fabrics, and denial of Notification No. 253/82 were set aside because there was no independent corroboration such as stock, seizure, raw material movement, or verified recipient evidence, and the claim to the notification benefit was not rebutted on reliable material. Liability therefore remained confined to the shortage and seized cotton fabrics, with the balance demands and consequential penalties interfered with accordingly. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244669 Duty demands based on admitted stock shortage and seized cotton fabrics were sustained because the shortage, seizure, related statements, and prior payment of duty provided sufficient circumstantial evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal. The remaining demands based on private records, alleged manufacture of man-made fabrics, and denial of Notification No. 253/82 were set aside because there was no independent corroboration such as stock, seizure, raw material movement, or verified recipient evidence, and the claim to the notification benefit was not rebutted on reliable material. Liability therefore remained confined to the shortage and seized cotton fabrics, with the balance demands and consequential penalties interfered with accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244669