https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372339 Clandestine removal of MS ingots was not proved because the department relied on private records, transporter documents, statements and cash deposits without a reliable corroborative chain; minor invoice differences and the absence of stock discrepancy were insufficient, and the chosen quantification method was not convincingly explained. The duty demand therefore could not stand. Wrongful MODVAT credit was also not established, as the evidence consisted mainly of statements from persons already exonerated in earlier proceedings and insignificant slips or invoice discrepancies, without proof of unaccounted raw material procurement or fraudulent credit. The related penalties failed with the substantive charge, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Dec 2018 06:50:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372339 Clandestine removal of MS ingots was not proved because the department relied on private records, transporter documents, statements and cash deposits without a reliable corroborative chain; minor invoice differences and the absence of stock discrepancy were insufficient, and the chosen quantification method was not convincingly explained. The duty demand therefore could not stand. Wrongful MODVAT credit was also not established, as the evidence consisted mainly of statements from persons already exonerated in earlier proceedings and insignificant slips or invoice discrepancies, without proof of unaccounted raw material procurement or fraudulent credit. The related penalties failed with the substantive charge, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372339