Confiscation of offending excisable goods upheld where Rule 226 applied without proof of mens rea and records were not maintained.

Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules permits confiscation of offending excisable goods without proof of mens rea, and non-entry of such goods in the prescribed records supported the finding that they were liable to confiscation. The Tribunal held that the seized goods were established as offending goods and that the show cause notice had properly invoked Rule 226 with the relevant provisions. The absence of the appellant's representation did not alter the conclusion on confiscability. The confiscation was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether confiscation of seized excisable goods was sustainable under Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules in the absence of mens rea and where the goods were not entered in the prescribed records.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that Rule 226 does not require proof of mens rea for confiscation of offending goods. It found that the seized goods were established to be of offending nature and that the show cause notice had correctly invoked Rule 226 along with the other relevant provisions. On those facts, the absence of the appellant's representation did not affect the conclusion that the goods were liable to confiscation.

Conclusion: Confiscation of the goods was upheld and the challenge to the impugned order failed.

---