https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457322 A demand alleging clandestine removal based only on discrepancies between ER-1 returns and balance-sheet figures was not sustainable on the existing record where there was no direct evidence of transport, buyers, or receipt of consideration. The appellant's balance-sheet entries, ledgers, and chartered accountant's certificate were said to explain the difference as advance or forward sales, but those documents were not properly verified. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh de novo adjudication after reconsideration of the documentary reconciliation. en-us Wed, 23 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Sep 2024 20:01:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457322 A demand alleging clandestine removal based only on discrepancies between ER-1 returns and balance-sheet figures was not sustainable on the existing record where there was no direct evidence of transport, buyers, or receipt of consideration. The appellant's balance-sheet entries, ledgers, and chartered accountant's certificate were said to explain the difference as advance or forward sales, but those documents were not properly verified. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh de novo adjudication after reconsideration of the documentary reconciliation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457322