https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82219 Goods cleared under a concessional scheme remained liable to duty where they were not used as declared, were not duly accounted for, and the samples showed that part of the consignment did not conform to the prescribed description. Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was therefore attracted, and the duty demand on the non-conforming and unaccounted quantity was upheld. However, appropriation from the security deposit was not sustained because the oil found in the factory tanks was not the excisable goods contemplated for confiscation and forfeiture under that rule. The recovery by appropriation was set aside, while the duty liability remained in force. en-us Tue, 07 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2011 17:24:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82219 Goods cleared under a concessional scheme remained liable to duty where they were not used as declared, were not duly accounted for, and the samples showed that part of the consignment did not conform to the prescribed description. Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was therefore attracted, and the duty demand on the non-conforming and unaccounted quantity was upheld. However, appropriation from the security deposit was not sustained because the oil found in the factory tanks was not the excisable goods contemplated for confiscation and forfeiture under that rule. The recovery by appropriation was set aside, while the duty liability remained in force. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82219