Bona fide belief and absence of mens rea can justify reducing redemption fines and deleting personal penalty for procedural excise breaches.

Excisable goods were cleared without the prescribed invoice and without written permission, so the contravention was not wholly excusable. Even so, the assessee claimed a verbal assurance from a departmental officer and acted under a bona fide belief that no wrongdoing was involved; in the absence of mens rea, the redemption fines were found excessive and the personal penalty was unjustified. The redemption fine on the goods and on the truck was reduced, and the personal penalty was set aside, while the remaining order was maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation-related redemption fines and personal penalty were liable to be reduced or set aside in a case where excisable goods were cleared without invoice on the alleged verbal assurance of the departmental officer.

Analysis: The removal of goods was found to be without the prescribed invoice and without written permission, so the departmental action was not wholly unwarranted. However, the circumstances indicated that the assessee had acted under a claimed verbal assurance and with the belief that no wrong was being done. In the absence of strict procedural compliance and considering the absence of mens rea, the quantum of redemption fines was found excessive and the personal penalty was not justified.

Conclusion: The redemption fine on the goods was reduced, the redemption fine on the truck was reduced, and the personal penalty was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of reduction of fines and deletion of personal penalty, while the rest of the order was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the contravention is procedural and the assessee acts under a bona fide belief without mens rea, monetary penalties may be moderated or deleted even though the clearance is otherwise irregular.

---