https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170083 A charge of clandestine removal of aluminium sections failed because duty demand and equal penalty were sought mainly on transporter records, disputed statements, and alleged unaccounted furnace oil and scrap, without cogent corroborative evidence of manufacture, buyers, parallel invoices, excess electricity use, or a reliable link to clearance from the factory. The duty demand and Section 11AC penalty were set aside. Finished goods found in the factory were upheld as confiscable for non-entry in RG-1, but that omission was treated as a technical lapse rather than proof of intent to evade duty. Confiscation was maintained, while redemption fine and related personal penalties were reduced or set aside. en-us Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170083 A charge of clandestine removal of aluminium sections failed because duty demand and equal penalty were sought mainly on transporter records, disputed statements, and alleged unaccounted furnace oil and scrap, without cogent corroborative evidence of manufacture, buyers, parallel invoices, excess electricity use, or a reliable link to clearance from the factory. The duty demand and Section 11AC penalty were set aside. Finished goods found in the factory were upheld as confiscable for non-entry in RG-1, but that omission was treated as a technical lapse rather than proof of intent to evade duty. Confiscation was maintained, while redemption fine and related personal penalties were reduced or set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170083