https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201775 Admissions that inputs on which CENVAT credit was taken were not received, together with acceptance of duty liability on cleared fabrics, supported confirmation of the duty demand and consequential penalties. In the absence of any rebuttal, the goods and inputs were treated as disposed of in violation of the Central Excise Rules and the CENVAT Credit Rules, justifying confiscation and penalty. The Revenue's separate challenge on interest failed because no specific legal provision or adequate factual foundation was shown, and the reduced penalty for the other unit was sustained on the record. The lower appellate order was therefore affirmed in substance. en-us Wed, 22 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2015 12:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201775 Admissions that inputs on which CENVAT credit was taken were not received, together with acceptance of duty liability on cleared fabrics, supported confirmation of the duty demand and consequential penalties. In the absence of any rebuttal, the goods and inputs were treated as disposed of in violation of the Central Excise Rules and the CENVAT Credit Rules, justifying confiscation and penalty. The Revenue's separate challenge on interest failed because no specific legal provision or adequate factual foundation was shown, and the reduced penalty for the other unit was sustained on the record. The lower appellate order was therefore affirmed in substance. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201775