https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272764 Clandestine removal cannot be inferred from a stock discrepancy where the goods covered by job work challans were accounted for at another premises of the same job worker and the quantity difference was attributable to estimated weighment rather than actual physical verification. In the absence of corroborative evidence such as unaccounted raw material, abnormal electricity consumption, buyer statements or other material showing secret clearance, the alleged shortage was insufficient to sustain duty demand, confiscation or penalty. Clearances of semi-finished goods for job work, on these facts, did not justify an adverse inference. The allegation failed and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272764 Clandestine removal cannot be inferred from a stock discrepancy where the goods covered by job work challans were accounted for at another premises of the same job worker and the quantity difference was attributable to estimated weighment rather than actual physical verification. In the absence of corroborative evidence such as unaccounted raw material, abnormal electricity consumption, buyer statements or other material showing secret clearance, the alleged shortage was insufficient to sustain duty demand, confiscation or penalty. Clearances of semi-finished goods for job work, on these facts, did not justify an adverse inference. The allegation failed and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272764