https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52821 Private diary entries, by themselves, were insufficient to establish clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods where the department produced no corroborative evidence of unaccounted raw material procurement, unrecorded production, actual removal, or buyer confirmation. The appellant's explanation that the diary was only a planning record was not displaced by independent proof. On these facts, the allegation of clandestine removal was not proved, and the demand and penalty could not be sustained. en-us Wed, 11 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2010 09:59:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52821 Private diary entries, by themselves, were insufficient to establish clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods where the department produced no corroborative evidence of unaccounted raw material procurement, unrecorded production, actual removal, or buyer confirmation. The appellant's explanation that the diary was only a planning record was not displaced by independent proof. On these facts, the allegation of clandestine removal was not proved, and the demand and penalty could not be sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52821