https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350369 The Tribunal upheld the duty demand on the appellant for wrongfully availing CENVAT credit on inputs not received and for clandestinely removing finished goods without paying duty. The appellant's liability was established through evidence of diversion of goods and admission of irregular practices. The Tribunal also supported the department's quantification of duty demand based on discrepancies in input receipts and invoked the extended period of limitation due to willful suppression of facts. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalties imposed on the appellant for these violations. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350369 The Tribunal upheld the duty demand on the appellant for wrongfully availing CENVAT credit on inputs not received and for clandestinely removing finished goods without paying duty. The appellant's liability was established through evidence of diversion of goods and admission of irregular practices. The Tribunal also supported the department's quantification of duty demand based on discrepancies in input receipts and invoked the extended period of limitation due to willful suppression of facts. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalties imposed on the appellant for these violations. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350369