Finality of appellate findings barred fresh duty demand and penalties on alleged clandestine removal.

An appellate finding that clandestine removal was not proved had already attained finality because the department did not challenge the Commissioner (Appeals)' detailed order on the same transaction. On that basis, a later order could not take a contrary view on the same facts and sustain duty demand and penalties against the assessee and connected parties. The confirmation of duty and penalties was therefore unsustainable, and the demand and penalties were set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of duty and penalties could be sustained when the earlier appellate order had already held that clandestine removal of the goods by the assessee was not substantiated.

Analysis: The earlier order of the Commissioner (Appeals), which had given detailed findings on the same transaction, had concluded that the allegation of clandestine removal was not proved. That finding had attained finality as the department did not challenge it. In these circumstances, the impugned order could not validly take a contrary view on the same set of facts and transactions, and the confirmation of duty and penalties on the assessee and the connected penalties on others could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The demand of duty and the penalties were set aside and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.

---