https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83666 Stock discrepancy was partly reconciled, so duty could be sustained only on the unreconciled shortage, while the explained portion was accepted. In the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the remaining shortage, duty liability was upheld for that part alone. Goods found excess in the bonded store room were treated as likely arising from accounting error rather than mala fide removal, so confiscation was not sustained. The redemption fine and penalty were therefore remitted. The decision turns on reconciliation of stock records and the absence of evidence of clandestine intent. en-us Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 18:09:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83666 Stock discrepancy was partly reconciled, so duty could be sustained only on the unreconciled shortage, while the explained portion was accepted. In the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the remaining shortage, duty liability was upheld for that part alone. Goods found excess in the bonded store room were treated as likely arising from accounting error rather than mala fide removal, so confiscation was not sustained. The redemption fine and penalty were therefore remitted. The decision turns on reconciliation of stock records and the absence of evidence of clandestine intent. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83666