https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93050 Confiscation of excess stock could not be sustained merely because the recorded balance was exceeded when there was no evidence of clandestine removal, and a satisfactory explanation for the storage discrepancy was accepted; the confiscation was therefore set aside. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was, however, correctly denied because the prescribed procedure was not followed, including the absence of prior permission and the required intimation before receipt of the consignments; the credit was treated as wrongly taken and the denial was upheld. The assessee obtained only partial relief. en-us Thu, 16 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Nov 2011 18:48:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93050 Confiscation of excess stock could not be sustained merely because the recorded balance was exceeded when there was no evidence of clandestine removal, and a satisfactory explanation for the storage discrepancy was accepted; the confiscation was therefore set aside. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was, however, correctly denied because the prescribed procedure was not followed, including the absence of prior permission and the required intimation before receipt of the consignments; the credit was treated as wrongly taken and the denial was upheld. The assessee obtained only partial relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93050