https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83668 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the order-in-appeal, where manufacturers contested duty payment demand for sodium bi-chromate. Allegations of duty non-payment due to discrepancies in production reports were refuted, citing a time bar defense and potential double payment concerns. Despite concerns of clandestine removal and penalty imposition, the Tribunal accepted the appellants' explanations, emphasizing the singular nature of the case and granting the benefit of doubt, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants. en-us Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 18:12:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83668 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the order-in-appeal, where manufacturers contested duty payment demand for sodium bi-chromate. Allegations of duty non-payment due to discrepancies in production reports were refuted, citing a time bar defense and potential double payment concerns. Despite concerns of clandestine removal and penalty imposition, the Tribunal accepted the appellants' explanations, emphasizing the singular nature of the case and granting the benefit of doubt, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83668