https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381113 Clandestine removal allegations require credible, substantive evidence of actual suppressed manufacture and clearance; theoretical electricity-consumption norms, assumed process loss and cost-to-sale-price comparisons are insufficient without factory-specific technical verification. Uncorroborated expert opinion is advisory and cannot substitute factual proof, while a Chartered Accountant certificate showing profit requires meaningful consideration in any cost analysis. Suspicion, however strong, does not establish duty liability, interest or penalties. Tax demands founded on hypotheses rather than reliable evidence of manufacture and removal lack the proof required for levy by authority of law. en-us Mon, 03 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Jun 2019 07:59:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381113 Clandestine removal allegations require credible, substantive evidence of actual suppressed manufacture and clearance; theoretical electricity-consumption norms, assumed process loss and cost-to-sale-price comparisons are insufficient without factory-specific technical verification. Uncorroborated expert opinion is advisory and cannot substitute factual proof, while a Chartered Accountant certificate showing profit requires meaningful consideration in any cost analysis. Suspicion, however strong, does not establish duty liability, interest or penalties. Tax demands founded on hypotheses rather than reliable evidence of manufacture and removal lack the proof required for levy by authority of law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381113