https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361295 Demand of central excise duty for alleged under-valuation or clandestine removal cannot rest solely on loose papers, computer printouts, or recorded statements. The note states that seized material must be compared with audited books and supported by independent corroboration, such as buyer statements, transport records, or proof of receipt of consideration, before any suppression allegation can stand. It further states that witness statements relied upon for duty demand must satisfy the statutory cross-examination safeguard under Section 9D. In the absence of such corroboration and procedural compliance, the demand is not sustainable. en-us Thu, 22 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jun 2018 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361295 Demand of central excise duty for alleged under-valuation or clandestine removal cannot rest solely on loose papers, computer printouts, or recorded statements. The note states that seized material must be compared with audited books and supported by independent corroboration, such as buyer statements, transport records, or proof of receipt of consideration, before any suppression allegation can stand. It further states that witness statements relied upon for duty demand must satisfy the statutory cross-examination safeguard under Section 9D. In the absence of such corroboration and procedural compliance, the demand is not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361295