https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122251 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's duty demand against the applicants, partners of a company, for improper clearance of goods without duty payment. Despite the applicants' argument that a second statement negated the first one regarding shortage, the Tribunal found both statements consistently admitted to the malpractice. The duty demand was deemed justified based on admitted facts, directing the applicants to pay the demanded amount as a pre-deposit with a penalty. Joint and several liability was imposed on the partners, with a waiver of the remaining penalty upon payment by a specified date. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 17:00:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122251 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's duty demand against the applicants, partners of a company, for improper clearance of goods without duty payment. Despite the applicants' argument that a second statement negated the first one regarding shortage, the Tribunal found both statements consistently admitted to the malpractice. The duty demand was deemed justified based on admitted facts, directing the applicants to pay the demanded amount as a pre-deposit with a penalty. Joint and several liability was imposed on the partners, with a waiver of the remaining penalty upon payment by a specified date. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122251