Non-accountal of excisable goods can justify confiscation and penalty without proving intent to evade duty, while fixed assets were spared.

Non-accountal of excisable goods under Rule 173Q(1)(b) attracts confiscation and penalty without proof of intent to evade duty, because that requirement is linked only to Rule 173Q(1)(d). The note also states that confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was unwarranted on the facts and was set aside. The stated ratio is that self-removal regime violations involving unaccounted goods can be penalised independently of intent, but fixed and immovable assets are not automatically liable to confiscation on that basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether confiscation and penalty for non-accountal of excisable goods under Rule 173Q(1)(b) require proof of intent to evade duty; (ii) Whether confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was justified.

Issue (i): Whether confiscation and penalty for non-accountal of excisable goods under Rule 173Q(1)(b) require proof of intent to evade duty.

Analysis: Rule 173Q(1)(b) authorises confiscation and penal action where excisable goods manufactured, produced or stored are not accounted for. The element of intent to evade duty is specifically associated with Rule 173Q(1)(d) and is not a prerequisite for action under Rule 173Q(1)(b). Non-accountal under the self-removal regime, therefore, attracts confiscation and penalty.

Conclusion: The requirement of intent to evade duty does not apply to Rule 173Q(1)(b); the Revenue's challenge on this issue succeeds.

Issue (ii): Whether confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was justified.

Analysis: The confiscation of immovable and fixed assets was found to be unwarranted in the circumstances of the case, and that part of the adjudication was set aside.

Conclusion: Confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was not justified and was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in substance, with the order of the lower appellate authority set aside and the original adjudication restored with modification, while the confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was deleted.

Ratio Decidendi: For non-accountal of excisable goods, confiscation and penalty can be imposed under Rule 173Q(1)(b) without proof of intent to evade duty, because that requirement pertains only to Rule 173Q(1)(d).

---