Admitted shortage and accepted duty liability sustain penalty under Rule 173Q when duress is not established.

An admitted shortage of finished goods and raw materials, together with the commercial manager's acceptance of duty liability in the register, was treated as sufficient basis for penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The explanation that the statement was recorded under duress was rejected, and the Tribunal noted that duty liability was not contested. On that footing, the penalty was considered justified and the appellate order was upheld, with no interference called for against the reduced penalty and duty demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules was unjustifiable and called for interference.

Analysis: The shortage of finished goods and raw materials was admitted by the commercial manager, who also debited the duty in the register. The plea that the statement was recorded under duress was rejected. The duty liability was not contested before the Tribunal, and the admitted contravention furnished sufficient basis for imposition of penalty.

Conclusion: The penalty was held to be justified and the appellate order was upheld.

Final Conclusion: No interference was warranted with the order sustaining the duty demand and reduced penalty, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: An admitted shortage and accepted duty liability are sufficient to sustain penalty under Rule 173Q where the explanation of duress is not accepted.

---