https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217609 The appeal was partly allowed, annulling the duty demand but confirming the penalty imposition due to the appellant's failure to provide details from 1994. The delay in seeking appeal remedy was attributed to health reasons of the authorized officer, which was accepted by the Revenue without objection. The Tribunal disposed of the stay application and the appeal together, waiving the pre-deposit requirement due to the lengthy litigation history. The disallowance of Cenvat credit was reduced, and the duty demand related to non-receipt or non-delivery of goods was annulled. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217609 The appeal was partly allowed, annulling the duty demand but confirming the penalty imposition due to the appellant's failure to provide details from 1994. The delay in seeking appeal remedy was attributed to health reasons of the authorized officer, which was accepted by the Revenue without objection. The Tribunal disposed of the stay application and the appeal together, waiving the pre-deposit requirement due to the lengthy litigation history. The disallowance of Cenvat credit was reduced, and the duty demand related to non-receipt or non-delivery of goods was annulled. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217609