https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54736 Clandestine removal allegations for decorative plywood require tangible, corroborative evidence linking seized goods to manufacture and clearance from the factory. Dealer statements, private delivery chits and brand labels, without test results, raw material recovery or independent investigation, were treated as insufficient to prove manufacture or secret removal. Once that foundation failed, the related duty demand, interest and penalties could not be sustained. Confiscation of seized goods was also held impermissible where the owners were not given notice and the underlying removal allegation was not established. The impugned orders were accordingly set aside. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2024 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54736 Clandestine removal allegations for decorative plywood require tangible, corroborative evidence linking seized goods to manufacture and clearance from the factory. Dealer statements, private delivery chits and brand labels, without test results, raw material recovery or independent investigation, were treated as insufficient to prove manufacture or secret removal. Once that foundation failed, the related duty demand, interest and penalties could not be sustained. Confiscation of seized goods was also held impermissible where the owners were not given notice and the underlying removal allegation was not established. The impugned orders were accordingly set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54736