Unauthorised clearance of excisable goods without invoice upheld confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties for the manufacturer and director.

Clearance of M.S. ingots from the factory without payment of duty and without a proper central excise invoice justified confiscation and penal consequences, because the evidence showed the goods were loaded from the manufacturer's factory while no excise records or duty-paid invoice were produced. The unauthorised removal contravened Rule 9(1) and Rule 52-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, rendering the goods liable to confiscation under Rule 173Q(1). The director's knowledge of the clearance also supported penalty under Rule 209-A. Confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties on the manufacturer and director were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized M.S. ingots were cleared from the factory without payment of duty and without a proper central excise invoice, so as to justify confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties on the manufacturer and its director.

Analysis: The trucks were intercepted while carrying M.S. ingots with documents showing another dealer as consignor, while the drivers stated that the goods had been loaded from the manufacturer's factory. When the officers visited the factory, no excise records were made available and no invoice showing duty payment accompanied the goods. On the evidence, the clearance of goods from the factory without payment of duty and without invoice was established. Such clearance contravened Rule 9(1) and Rule 52-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and rendered the goods liable to confiscation under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The director's knowledge of the unauthorised clearance also justified penalty under Rule 209-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Conclusion: The confiscation of the goods, the redemption fine, and the penalties on both appellants were upheld.

---