https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235909 The Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed on the appellant for shortages of goods and violations of Central Excise rules, citing misstatement and suppression of facts. The appellant's deposit of 25% penalty before the order was issued was denied as Section 11AC was deemed inapplicable to dealers. The penalties under Rule 25 were upheld due to proven clandestine removal of goods, with the Tribunal emphasizing the absence of reduced penalty benefits under Section 11AC. en-us Wed, 29 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Sep 2015 09:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235909 The Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed on the appellant for shortages of goods and violations of Central Excise rules, citing misstatement and suppression of facts. The appellant's deposit of 25% penalty before the order was issued was denied as Section 11AC was deemed inapplicable to dealers. The penalties under Rule 25 were upheld due to proven clandestine removal of goods, with the Tribunal emphasizing the absence of reduced penalty benefits under Section 11AC. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235909