Prior approval and written notice under excise procedure matter; procedural breach found, but penalty reduced on facts.

Failure to obtain prior approval of the revised price list and to comply with the written notice requirement before resuming production was treated as contravention of the Central Excise Rules, because mere postal dispatch did not prove compliance and the record did not establish approved filing before clearances. The fact that duty had been paid, the revised price list was later approved, and no evasion was shown did not remove the procedural breach in the self-removal regime. Penalty was therefore warranted, but was reduced on the facts from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 5,000.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee had contravened the Central Excise Rules by clearing goods after submitting a revised price list without prior approval, and whether the penalty imposed required interference.

Analysis: The assessee had informed the department about suspension of production, but later clearances were found on surprise check. The record did not establish conclusive prior intimation or approved filing of the revised price list before clearances were effected. The rules required written notice before resumption of production and prior approval of the price list, and mere postal dispatch was held insufficient to prove compliance. At the same time, the clearances were stated to have been made on payment of duty, the revised price list was later approved, and no attempt at evasion was shown. In the self-removal regime, however, strict compliance with procedural requirements could not be treated as a mere formality.

Conclusion: The assessee was held to be in contravention of the excise rules, but the penalty was reduced from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 5,000.

---