https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346720 Matched kachha parchis and invoices, supported by RG-1 entries and ledger records, were treated as evidence of duty-paid clearances, so the demand linked to those slips was not sustained. For the remaining slips, the text states that a charge of clandestine removal cannot rest only on inculpatory statements under section 14; it requires independent, tangible and corroborative evidence such as buyer, transporter or investigative verification. In the absence of such support, the demand and connected penalties were set aside. en-us Sat, 03 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:30:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346720 Matched kachha parchis and invoices, supported by RG-1 entries and ledger records, were treated as evidence of duty-paid clearances, so the demand linked to those slips was not sustained. For the remaining slips, the text states that a charge of clandestine removal cannot rest only on inculpatory statements under section 14; it requires independent, tangible and corroborative evidence such as buyer, transporter or investigative verification. In the absence of such support, the demand and connected penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 03 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346720