https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52483 An un-retracted admission by the proprietor of suppressed production and removal of goods without duty payment was treated as substantive evidence, so the absence of a panchnama or independent witnesses did not weaken the duty demand. Deliberate evasion supported penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, and payment after detection did not amount to voluntary compliance before notice. The duty confirmation was sustained, while the penalty was maintained but reduced on the facts, including the post-raid deposit of duty. en-us Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Aug 2024 11:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52483 An un-retracted admission by the proprietor of suppressed production and removal of goods without duty payment was treated as substantive evidence, so the absence of a panchnama or independent witnesses did not weaken the duty demand. Deliberate evasion supported penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, and payment after detection did not amount to voluntary compliance before notice. The duty confirmation was sustained, while the penalty was maintained but reduced on the facts, including the post-raid deposit of duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52483