https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190526 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposition based on stock shortage during investigation. The appellant's argument that the payment made during investigation should suffice was accepted, citing Section 11A(5)(6) provisions. The Tribunal found the stock taking method questionable due to minimal shortages and lack of evidence of clandestine removal. Emphasizing the payment of duty, interest, and penalty should conclude the matter, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal with consequential relief as the Revenue lacked evidence to sustain the allegation of clandestine removal. en-us Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Feb 2017 10:17:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190526 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposition based on stock shortage during investigation. The appellant's argument that the payment made during investigation should suffice was accepted, citing Section 11A(5)(6) provisions. The Tribunal found the stock taking method questionable due to minimal shortages and lack of evidence of clandestine removal. Emphasizing the payment of duty, interest, and penalty should conclude the matter, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal with consequential relief as the Revenue lacked evidence to sustain the allegation of clandestine removal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190526