https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3058 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act could not be sustained on the basis of admitted shortage of inputs alone, because clandestine removal must be supported by corroborative evidence such as statements or private records; in the absence of such proof, the penalty was held not exigible. Interest under Section 11AB was also not recoverable, since the credit had been reversed on the date of search and the period for which the credit remained availed was not established. The departmental challenge therefore failed, and the assessee retained the relief granted by the appellate authority. en-us Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3058 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act could not be sustained on the basis of admitted shortage of inputs alone, because clandestine removal must be supported by corroborative evidence such as statements or private records; in the absence of such proof, the penalty was held not exigible. Interest under Section 11AB was also not recoverable, since the credit had been reversed on the date of search and the period for which the credit remained availed was not established. The departmental challenge therefore failed, and the assessee retained the relief granted by the appellate authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3058