https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52222 Clandestine removal of cement could not be sustained on railway receipts and third-party documents alone where the adjudication ignored the assessee's certificates, commercial and excise invoices, freight details, and contemporaneous purchaser records. The majority held that railway receipts obtained from the Railways, without corroboration such as evidence of raw material procurement, excess production, truck movement, freight payment, buyer confirmation, or stock and account discrepancies, were insufficient to prove clandestine manufacture and removal. It also held that remand was unnecessary because the record already contained enough material for decision and remand cannot be used to cure gaps in the department's investigation. The duty demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2010 12:30:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52222 Clandestine removal of cement could not be sustained on railway receipts and third-party documents alone where the adjudication ignored the assessee's certificates, commercial and excise invoices, freight details, and contemporaneous purchaser records. The majority held that railway receipts obtained from the Railways, without corroboration such as evidence of raw material procurement, excess production, truck movement, freight payment, buyer confirmation, or stock and account discrepancies, were insufficient to prove clandestine manufacture and removal. It also held that remand was unnecessary because the record already contained enough material for decision and remand cannot be used to cure gaps in the department's investigation. The duty demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52222