https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395849 Allegations of clandestine removal in central excise must be supported by tangible corroborative evidence, not merely loose papers, estimated stock shortages or presumptive inferences. The record did not establish who authored the loose papers, whether they reflected actual clearances, or whether the entries were verified through buyers, transporters, raw material purchases, production data or power consumption. Stock verification based on sectional weight and estimation was found insufficient by itself to prove actual shortage or clandestine removal. On that basis, the demand and penalty were held unsustainable and the assessee succeeded. en-us Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395849 Allegations of clandestine removal in central excise must be supported by tangible corroborative evidence, not merely loose papers, estimated stock shortages or presumptive inferences. The record did not establish who authored the loose papers, whether they reflected actual clearances, or whether the entries were verified through buyers, transporters, raw material purchases, production data or power consumption. Stock verification based on sectional weight and estimation was found insufficient by itself to prove actual shortage or clandestine removal. On that basis, the demand and penalty were held unsustainable and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395849