https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381423 Demand of duty for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of M.S. ingots failed because private records, loose sheets and unsupported statements were held insufficient without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal stressed that clandestine removal is a serious quasi-criminal allegation and must be proved by tangible material such as extra raw material procurement, excess electricity use, labour payment records, transport evidence and flow of funds. It also noted the need to examine the author of documents under Section 9D of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that basis, the duty demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Sun, 17 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jun 2019 05:53:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381423 Demand of duty for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of M.S. ingots failed because private records, loose sheets and unsupported statements were held insufficient without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal stressed that clandestine removal is a serious quasi-criminal allegation and must be proved by tangible material such as extra raw material procurement, excess electricity use, labour payment records, transport evidence and flow of funds. It also noted the need to examine the author of documents under Section 9D of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that basis, the duty demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Sun, 17 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381423