https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246675 Shortage noticed during stock verification, coupled with a statement of the authorised signatory, was held insufficient to sustain demand of duty, interest and penalty in the absence of independent corroboration. The tribunal emphasised that clandestine manufacture and removal must be proved by concrete and tangible evidence; a mere admission is only one relevant piece of evidence and not conclusive proof. As no inventory or other material supported the alleged stock discrepancy, and there was no indication of raw-material stock variation, the demand was found unsustainable and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief. en-us Mon, 26 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:39:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246675 Shortage noticed during stock verification, coupled with a statement of the authorised signatory, was held insufficient to sustain demand of duty, interest and penalty in the absence of independent corroboration. The tribunal emphasised that clandestine manufacture and removal must be proved by concrete and tangible evidence; a mere admission is only one relevant piece of evidence and not conclusive proof. As no inventory or other material supported the alleged stock discrepancy, and there was no indication of raw-material stock variation, the demand was found unsustainable and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 26 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246675