https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362092 Credit under Rule 16 for returned rejected goods requires contemporaneous, credible evidence that the goods were actually processed and cleared on payment of duty. In this CESTAT Mumbai matter, the absence of original records, the failure of daily production reports to reflect repair or rejected goods, and statements indicating that the goods were cut and scrapped meant the appellants could not substantiate the claim. A later computer-generated chart unsupported by primary documents was rejected as unreliable. The article also notes that fabrication of evidence supported the penalty on the individual appellant. en-us Fri, 25 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:27:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362092 Credit under Rule 16 for returned rejected goods requires contemporaneous, credible evidence that the goods were actually processed and cleared on payment of duty. In this CESTAT Mumbai matter, the absence of original records, the failure of daily production reports to reflect repair or rejected goods, and statements indicating that the goods were cut and scrapped meant the appellants could not substantiate the claim. A later computer-generated chart unsupported by primary documents was rejected as unreliable. The article also notes that fabrication of evidence supported the penalty on the individual appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362092