https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372003 The Tribunal upheld the demand for central excise duty but set aside the penalty under Section 11AC due to lack of evidence for clandestine removal of goods. A general penalty of &8377;5,000 under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, was imposed for rule breach. The appellant's concerns about the violation of natural justice were considered, and despite the shortage of MS Flat during physical verification, the imposition of Section 11AC penalty was deemed unwarranted. The appeal was disposed of with the mentioned terms in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Dec 2018 06:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372003 The Tribunal upheld the demand for central excise duty but set aside the penalty under Section 11AC due to lack of evidence for clandestine removal of goods. A general penalty of &8377;5,000 under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, was imposed for rule breach. The appellant's concerns about the violation of natural justice were considered, and despite the shortage of MS Flat during physical verification, the imposition of Section 11AC penalty was deemed unwarranted. The appeal was disposed of with the mentioned terms in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372003