https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178495 Concurrent findings that admitted shortages of inputs and finished goods supported the excise duty demand and did not raise any substantial question of law. The factual record was sufficient, and the duty liability was therefore upheld. Penalties imposed on the assessee firm and its partners under the erstwhile Central Excise Rules were not sustained because the penalty orders lacked an independent legal assessment of their statutory basis and merely followed the shortage finding. The penalty component was set aside, leaving the duty demand intact and the appeal partially allowed. en-us Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Feb 2016 15:25:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178495 Concurrent findings that admitted shortages of inputs and finished goods supported the excise duty demand and did not raise any substantial question of law. The factual record was sufficient, and the duty liability was therefore upheld. Penalties imposed on the assessee firm and its partners under the erstwhile Central Excise Rules were not sustained because the penalty orders lacked an independent legal assessment of their statutory basis and merely followed the shortage finding. The penalty component was set aside, leaving the duty demand intact and the appeal partially allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178495