https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266661 The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of duty but set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner emphasized the requirement of concrete evidence to prove clandestine removal of goods, stating that a mere shortage in finished products does not equate to clandestine clearance. As there was no evidence of clandestine removal, the penalty was deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the demand against the appellants was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellants. en-us Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Oct 2015 19:56:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266661 The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of duty but set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner emphasized the requirement of concrete evidence to prove clandestine removal of goods, stating that a mere shortage in finished products does not equate to clandestine clearance. As there was no evidence of clandestine removal, the penalty was deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the demand against the appellants was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266661