https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116539 A credit demand under Rule 57-I for removal of inputs on which credit had been taken was upheld where the inputs were found short and had been cleared for cash without reversal of credit or duty payment. The penalty under Rule 173Q(1) was restored because the statutory minimum applied and the facts supported action for non-accountal of inputs. By contrast, Section 11AC penalty and Section 11AB interest were held unsustainable, as the matter concerned wrongful credit recovery rather than a duty determination under Section 11A. The partner's penalty under Rule 209A was set aside because the proposed confiscation was not sustained and the basis for penal action was absent. en-us Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jun 2012 13:43:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116539 A credit demand under Rule 57-I for removal of inputs on which credit had been taken was upheld where the inputs were found short and had been cleared for cash without reversal of credit or duty payment. The penalty under Rule 173Q(1) was restored because the statutory minimum applied and the facts supported action for non-accountal of inputs. By contrast, Section 11AC penalty and Section 11AB interest were held unsustainable, as the matter concerned wrongful credit recovery rather than a duty determination under Section 11A. The partner's penalty under Rule 209A was set aside because the proposed confiscation was not sustained and the basis for penal action was absent. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116539