https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51460 Denial of Modvat credit on capital goods and the consequential penalty were found unsustainable because the department relied mainly on a single statement from an accounts officer who was not shown to be technically competent to verify installation or use of the goods. No panchanama, independent witness, incriminating document, or supporting investigation was produced, and there was no corroborative evidence that the capital goods were missing or that credit had been wrongly taken. The record therefore failed to provide the positive, tangible proof required to sustain demand or penalty, and the assessee succeeded. en-us Fri, 31 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:34:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51460 Denial of Modvat credit on capital goods and the consequential penalty were found unsustainable because the department relied mainly on a single statement from an accounts officer who was not shown to be technically competent to verify installation or use of the goods. No panchanama, independent witness, incriminating document, or supporting investigation was produced, and there was no corroborative evidence that the capital goods were missing or that credit had been wrongly taken. The record therefore failed to provide the positive, tangible proof required to sustain demand or penalty, and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 31 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51460