https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54743 Allegations of clandestine manufacture and removal must be supported by proper, cogent evidence; the Tribunal held that selective statements and doubtful inferences are insufficient to sustain duty demand and penalties. It found that the chemist was not the proper person to speak on grading of sheets, that the statement of Vishnubhai Patel relied upon by the adjudicating authority was not actually on record, and that the department had not established the charge with reliable evidence. The Tribunal also held that the adjudicating authority misapplied the evidentiary standard by shifting the burden to the assessee, and the demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 May 2024 13:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54743 Allegations of clandestine manufacture and removal must be supported by proper, cogent evidence; the Tribunal held that selective statements and doubtful inferences are insufficient to sustain duty demand and penalties. It found that the chemist was not the proper person to speak on grading of sheets, that the statement of Vishnubhai Patel relied upon by the adjudicating authority was not actually on record, and that the department had not established the charge with reliable evidence. The Tribunal also held that the adjudicating authority misapplied the evidentiary standard by shifting the burden to the assessee, and the demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54743