2017 (4) TMI 1553

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the penalty for non-maintenance of accounts does not ipso facto amounts to an admission as to clandestine removal of goods. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the onus of proof regarding clandestine movement is on the Revenue which attempts to impose a penalty. The decision of the CESTAT affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is in accordance with law. No subs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mere fact that the assessee had not challenged the penalty for non-maintenance of accounts does not ipso facto amounts to an admission as to clandestine removal of goods. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the onus of proof regarding clandestine movement is on the Revenue which attempts to impose a penalty. We are therefore of the view that the decision of the CESTAT affirming .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X