https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343210 CESTAT held that a demand of central excise duty and equal penalty for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of M.S. ingots could not be sustained on the basis of loose slips and statements alone. In the absence of corroborative evidence such as excess raw material procurement, discovery of unaccounted finished goods, identified buyers, proof of transport, or receipt of sale proceeds, the charge remained unproved. Applying the settled principle that clandestine activity must be established by tangible and corroborative evidence, the Tribunal set aside the demand and penalties in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jun 2017 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343210 CESTAT held that a demand of central excise duty and equal penalty for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of M.S. ingots could not be sustained on the basis of loose slips and statements alone. In the absence of corroborative evidence such as excess raw material procurement, discovery of unaccounted finished goods, identified buyers, proof of transport, or receipt of sale proceeds, the charge remained unproved. Applying the settled principle that clandestine activity must be established by tangible and corroborative evidence, the Tribunal set aside the demand and penalties in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343210