Computerised record-keeping and input declaration supported waiver of pre-deposit despite alleged procedural lapses.

Permission to maintain computerised records weighed against penal action for not making parallel manual postings, and the prima facie view was that insisting on manual records after computerised maintenance had been allowed did not justify penalty. The department had also accepted the Rule 57G declaration showing the final product as input, so the insistence on compliance with the procedure under Rule 173H was treated as excessive at the interim stage. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit of the penalties was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit of the penalties imposed for non-maintenance of manual records and for alleged non-compliance with the procedure relating to receipt of goods.

Analysis: Permission had been granted to maintain computerised records, and the only lapse noticed was the absence of manual postings after the computerised summary was not generated. On a prima facie view, once computerised maintenance was permitted, insistence on parallel manual records did not justify penalty. The department had also accepted the declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, showing the final product as input, and the insistence on procedure under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 appeared excessive at the interim stage.

Conclusion: Waiver of pre-deposit of the penalties was granted.

---