https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277749 Duty demand and penalty based on alleged stock shortage under Rule 223A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held unsustainable where the discrepancy arose from annual stock verification and estimation-based accounting, not from proof of clandestine removal. The Tribunal followed its earlier decisions in the assessee's own case and similar matters, which had rejected demands founded only on estimated stock differences. In the absence of material showing actual clandestine clearance, the confirmation of duty could not be upheld, and the demand with penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 13 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Dec 2018 05:51:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277749 Duty demand and penalty based on alleged stock shortage under Rule 223A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held unsustainable where the discrepancy arose from annual stock verification and estimation-based accounting, not from proof of clandestine removal. The Tribunal followed its earlier decisions in the assessee's own case and similar matters, which had rejected demands founded only on estimated stock differences. In the absence of material showing actual clandestine clearance, the confirmation of duty could not be upheld, and the demand with penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277749