https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364615 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation of finished goods and raw materials, ruling the seizure unjustified due to lack of entry in statutory records. It also deemed the seizure of finished goods at premises unwarranted, as they were non-commercial samples. The demand for differential duty was rejected for flawed calculation methodology, and interest demand was deemed improper. The penalty imposition for alleged duty shortfall was overturned, considering the unintentional discrepancies. The appellants were granted relief as the Tribunal found no mal intention in the duty-related issues. en-us Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Aug 2018 07:49:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364615 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation of finished goods and raw materials, ruling the seizure unjustified due to lack of entry in statutory records. It also deemed the seizure of finished goods at premises unwarranted, as they were non-commercial samples. The demand for differential duty was rejected for flawed calculation methodology, and interest demand was deemed improper. The penalty imposition for alleged duty shortfall was overturned, considering the unintentional discrepancies. The appellants were granted relief as the Tribunal found no mal intention in the duty-related issues. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364615