https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124452 Stock-taking discrepancies in a steel plant, arising from differing methods of accounting and estimation, could not by themselves sustain duty demand or extended limitation in the absence of evidence of clandestine removal. The mismatch between RG-1 records, annual stock-taking and physical stock was treated as requiring proper contextual appreciation, including the practical difficulties recognised in Board circulars. As no clandestine clearance was shown, the demand failed and the longer limitation period was not invocable. The penalty also fell because it was based on the same unsustainable demand. en-us Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Apr 2024 09:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124452 Stock-taking discrepancies in a steel plant, arising from differing methods of accounting and estimation, could not by themselves sustain duty demand or extended limitation in the absence of evidence of clandestine removal. The mismatch between RG-1 records, annual stock-taking and physical stock was treated as requiring proper contextual appreciation, including the practical difficulties recognised in Board circulars. As no clandestine clearance was shown, the demand failed and the longer limitation period was not invocable. The penalty also fell because it was based on the same unsustainable demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124452