https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245184 Prior filing of a registration application was treated as sufficiently established on a benefit-of-doubt basis where the application bore receiving initials but the receiver's identity was disputed. This undermined the basis for confiscating excess goods and imposing penalties for alleged non-registration. The applicable excise payment schedule, under which duty on clearances was payable by month-end, also meant that non-payment on the inspection date alone did not establish a contravention. Consequently, the demand, confiscation and penalties were set aside. en-us Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2014 06:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245184 Prior filing of a registration application was treated as sufficiently established on a benefit-of-doubt basis where the application bore receiving initials but the receiver's identity was disputed. This undermined the basis for confiscating excess goods and imposing penalties for alleged non-registration. The applicable excise payment schedule, under which duty on clearances was payable by month-end, also meant that non-payment on the inspection date alone did not establish a contravention. Consequently, the demand, confiscation and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245184