https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170422 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to set aside the penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act due to lack of corroboration for clandestine removal and absence of evidence implicating the authorized signatory in any wrongdoing. The Tribunal rejected the department's appeals, emphasizing that not every shortage can be presumed as clandestine removal without evidence, and since the conditions for invoking Section 11AC were not met, the penalty was rightly set aside. en-us Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 May 2015 14:45:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170422 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to set aside the penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act due to lack of corroboration for clandestine removal and absence of evidence implicating the authorized signatory in any wrongdoing. The Tribunal rejected the department's appeals, emphasizing that not every shortage can be presumed as clandestine removal without evidence, and since the conditions for invoking Section 11AC were not met, the penalty was rightly set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170422