Confiscation for alleged non-accounting failed on insufficient proof, but penalty stood for admitted non-production of statutory accounts.

Confiscation of electric wires and cables could not be sustained where the material did not conclusively prove that the goods were unaccounted for in the R.G. 1 register; late production of the register and the presence of finished goods were not enough to establish suppression, so the confiscation and redemption fine were set aside. However, the assessee's admitted failure to produce the statutory accounts before Central Excise officers on the date of visit established contravention of the obligation to produce accounts on demand, so the personal penalty for that default was upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether confiscation of 223 coils of electric wires and cables was justified for alleged non-accounting and contravention of Rule 173-G(4) read with Rule 53 of the Central Excise Rules; (ii) Whether the personal penalty for contravention of Rule 173-G(6) of the Central Excise Rules was sustainable.

Issue (i): Whether confiscation of 223 coils of electric wires and cables was justified for alleged non-accounting and contravention of Rule 173-G(4) read with Rule 53 of the Central Excise Rules.

Analysis: The available material did not conclusively establish that the seized coils were absent from the R.G. 1 register at the relevant time. The late production of the register and the presence of finished goods in the finishing room were not treated as decisive proof of non-entry or suppression. In the absence of clear evidence that the seal of the almirah had been tampered with or that the goods were not accounted for, the benefit of doubt was extended to the assessee.

Conclusion: The confiscation of 223 coils and the connected redemption fine were set aside in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the personal penalty for contravention of Rule 173-G(6) of the Central Excise Rules was sustainable.

Analysis: It was admitted that the assessee did not produce the R.G. 1 accounts before the Central Excise Officers on the date of visit and produced them only later at the Central Excise Office. On these admitted facts, failure to comply with the obligation to produce accounts on demand stood established.

Conclusion: The personal penalty for contravention of Rule 173-G(6) was upheld against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of setting aside the confiscation and redemption fine, while the penalty for failure to produce the statutory accounts was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the evidence does not conclusively prove non-accounting of goods, confiscation cannot be sustained on suspicion alone, but admitted non-production of statutory accounts on demand establishes contravention warranting penalty.

---