https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54637 A demand for clandestine removal cannot rest on private kutcha slips alone; without corroboration such as evidence of inputs, manufacture, sales, electricity use, or fund flow, the demand was set aside. Penalty under Section 11AC was reduced as disproportionate, while the penalty under Rule 173Q(1) was upheld for seized goods and pre-28-9-96 clearances. Penalties under Rule 209A on partners and connected persons were set aside for lack of a sufficient basis for individual liability. Confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery, with redemption fine, was sustained because removal of seized goods without duty payment was admitted. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Oct 2010 12:15:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54637 A demand for clandestine removal cannot rest on private kutcha slips alone; without corroboration such as evidence of inputs, manufacture, sales, electricity use, or fund flow, the demand was set aside. Penalty under Section 11AC was reduced as disproportionate, while the penalty under Rule 173Q(1) was upheld for seized goods and pre-28-9-96 clearances. Penalties under Rule 209A on partners and connected persons were set aside for lack of a sufficient basis for individual liability. Confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery, with redemption fine, was sustained because removal of seized goods without duty payment was admitted. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54637