https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340263 The Tribunal upheld the duty demand on goods clandestinely removed and recorded in a private notebook, rejecting the appellant's appeal due to lack of explanation or proof of duty discharge. Confiscation of unaccounted finished goods was upheld, dismissing the appellant's claim of testing purposes. However, the demand of duty based on balance sheet discrepancies was set aside for lack of evidence, while the personal penalty on the Director was reduced from Rs. 8 lakhs to Rs. 3 lakhs for excessive imposition. The original duty demand and penalty were maintained, while the confiscation of goods and reduced penalty were upheld. en-us Mon, 06 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340263 The Tribunal upheld the duty demand on goods clandestinely removed and recorded in a private notebook, rejecting the appellant's appeal due to lack of explanation or proof of duty discharge. Confiscation of unaccounted finished goods was upheld, dismissing the appellant's claim of testing purposes. However, the demand of duty based on balance sheet discrepancies was set aside for lack of evidence, while the personal penalty on the Director was reduced from Rs. 8 lakhs to Rs. 3 lakhs for excessive imposition. The original duty demand and penalty were maintained, while the confiscation of goods and reduced penalty were upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340263