https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111091 An invoice date discrepancy was treated as a clerical error, and duty-paid clearances were otherwise reflected in invoices and statutory records. A mere failure to make an RG-1 entry, without evidence of concealed production or removal, was held insufficient to establish non-accountal or clandestine removal. In the absence of material showing clearance without payment of duty, the basis for penalty under Rule 173Q was not made out, and the penalty could not be sustained. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:47:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111091 An invoice date discrepancy was treated as a clerical error, and duty-paid clearances were otherwise reflected in invoices and statutory records. A mere failure to make an RG-1 entry, without evidence of concealed production or removal, was held insufficient to establish non-accountal or clandestine removal. In the absence of material showing clearance without payment of duty, the basis for penalty under Rule 173Q was not made out, and the penalty could not be sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111091