https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167157 Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules applies only to clandestine or surreptitious removal of excisable goods, and the excise authorities bear the burden of proving such removal. On the record, there was no finding in the notice or orders that the goods were clandestinely cleared, and the approved classification list further undermined invocation of Rule 9(2). If any misstatement existed, the proper route was Rule 10 read with Rule 173J, which carried a one-year limitation. Because the show cause notice covered a period beyond that limit, the demand was time-barred and the appeal succeeded. en-us Wed, 01 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2014 15:26:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167157 Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules applies only to clandestine or surreptitious removal of excisable goods, and the excise authorities bear the burden of proving such removal. On the record, there was no finding in the notice or orders that the goods were clandestinely cleared, and the approved classification list further undermined invocation of Rule 9(2). If any misstatement existed, the proper route was Rule 10 read with Rule 173J, which carried a one-year limitation. Because the show cause notice covered a period beyond that limit, the demand was time-barred and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167157