https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387991 Allegations of clandestine removal of excisable goods failed because the demand rested mainly on third-party sales registers and records recovered from another premises, without independent corroboration. The supplier's and appellants' statements did not amount to admissions of purchase, payment, manufacture, or clearance, and no evidence completed the chain on raw materials, inputs, labour, power use, transport, financial flow, or finished-goods removal. A serious charge of clandestine removal cannot be sustained on isolated third-party documents alone. The duty demand and penalties were set aside, and the alternate exemption claim did not require separate adjudication. en-us Thu, 24 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 09:38:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387991 Allegations of clandestine removal of excisable goods failed because the demand rested mainly on third-party sales registers and records recovered from another premises, without independent corroboration. The supplier's and appellants' statements did not amount to admissions of purchase, payment, manufacture, or clearance, and no evidence completed the chain on raw materials, inputs, labour, power use, transport, financial flow, or finished-goods removal. A serious charge of clandestine removal cannot be sustained on isolated third-party documents alone. The duty demand and penalties were set aside, and the alternate exemption claim did not require separate adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387991