https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355591 Duty demand, valuation, confiscation-related consequences and penalties were sustained because recovered records from the assessee's and buyer's premises independently supported the allegations. Denial of cross-examination of former employees and panch witnesses did not invalidate the adjudication where the demand was not founded solely on their statements. Comparable invoice values were properly used for valuation because the assessee did not cooperate in the investigation or provide relevant particulars. The Tribunal therefore dismissed the challenges to the demand, valuation method and penalties. en-us Fri, 29 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Mar 2019 14:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355591 Duty demand, valuation, confiscation-related consequences and penalties were sustained because recovered records from the assessee's and buyer's premises independently supported the allegations. Denial of cross-examination of former employees and panch witnesses did not invalidate the adjudication where the demand was not founded solely on their statements. Comparable invoice values were properly used for valuation because the assessee did not cooperate in the investigation or provide relevant particulars. The Tribunal therefore dismissed the challenges to the demand, valuation method and penalties. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355591