https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333657 Private notebooks, loose papers, and an un-retracted inculpatory statement were treated as sufficient evidence to support clandestine removal, because the entries corroborated unaccounted receipts of raw materials and clearances of finished goods with and without duty payment. The absence of the supervisor's statement did not displace the evidentiary value of the director's admission. Suppression came to light only through departmental investigation and the material was outside statutory records, so the extended limitation period was available and the demand was held to be within time. The duty demand and consequential penalty were sustained. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jan 2018 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333657 Private notebooks, loose papers, and an un-retracted inculpatory statement were treated as sufficient evidence to support clandestine removal, because the entries corroborated unaccounted receipts of raw materials and clearances of finished goods with and without duty payment. The absence of the supervisor's statement did not displace the evidentiary value of the director's admission. Suppression came to light only through departmental investigation and the material was outside statutory records, so the extended limitation period was available and the demand was held to be within time. The duty demand and consequential penalty were sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333657