https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340413 Penalty on a managing director for alleged clandestine removal was confined to the extent supported by the surviving evidence after the Tribunal's earlier findings in the connected matter substantially reduced the proved demand. The Tribunal treated the earlier final order as decisive in narrowing the factual basis for individual liability, and held that the director's penalty could not remain at the original level where the broader allegation of clandestine activity was not sustained. The penalty was therefore reduced to Rs. 25,000 under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. en-us Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:00:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340413 Penalty on a managing director for alleged clandestine removal was confined to the extent supported by the surviving evidence after the Tribunal's earlier findings in the connected matter substantially reduced the proved demand. The Tribunal treated the earlier final order as decisive in narrowing the factual basis for individual liability, and held that the director's penalty could not remain at the original level where the broader allegation of clandestine activity was not sustained. The penalty was therefore reduced to Rs. 25,000 under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340413