https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108503 The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal modifying the original order, reinstating the confiscation of unaccounted goods. Despite reducing the redemption fine to Rs. 30,000 and the penalty to Rs. 20,000, the Tribunal emphasized the necessity of maintaining the confiscation based on the rules, faulting the Commissioner (Appeals) for inadequately justifying the penalty reduction. The Tribunal highlighted the precedence of the High Court's judgment over Tribunal decisions, ultimately disposing of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Mon, 12 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 18:41:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108503 The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal modifying the original order, reinstating the confiscation of unaccounted goods. Despite reducing the redemption fine to Rs. 30,000 and the penalty to Rs. 20,000, the Tribunal emphasized the necessity of maintaining the confiscation based on the rules, faulting the Commissioner (Appeals) for inadequately justifying the penalty reduction. The Tribunal highlighted the precedence of the High Court's judgment over Tribunal decisions, ultimately disposing of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108503