https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335735 Private notebooks, loose papers and stock verification, when corroborated by invoices and an un-retracted director's statement admitting receipt of raw materials and clandestine clearances, were treated as sufficient to prove clandestine removal of excisable goods and sustain the duty demand. The absence of a statement from the alleged notebook author did not displace the corroborated private records and admissions. Because the evasion was detected only through departmental investigation and the facts showed suppression from the department, the extended period of limitation was held invocable and the demand was not time-barred. The duty demand and connected consequences were restored. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335735 Private notebooks, loose papers and stock verification, when corroborated by invoices and an un-retracted director's statement admitting receipt of raw materials and clandestine clearances, were treated as sufficient to prove clandestine removal of excisable goods and sustain the duty demand. The absence of a statement from the alleged notebook author did not displace the corroborated private records and admissions. Because the evasion was detected only through departmental investigation and the facts showed suppression from the department, the extended period of limitation was held invocable and the demand was not time-barred. The duty demand and connected consequences were restored. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335735