https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83863 Penalty under the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained where gate passes were obtained and duty debits made before removal, because Rule 51A did not require duty-paid goods to be cleared on the same day duty was paid. The alleged non-accountal of 10,000 HDPE bags also failed, as the goods were received under the relevant delivery challan and invoice with store receipt endorsement, and no rule required delivery-challan-wise individual entries in RG 9 for every receipt. The inference of clandestine manufacture and removal was therefore unsupported, and the penalty and finding of clandestine removal were set aside. en-us Fri, 09 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:10:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83863 Penalty under the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained where gate passes were obtained and duty debits made before removal, because Rule 51A did not require duty-paid goods to be cleared on the same day duty was paid. The alleged non-accountal of 10,000 HDPE bags also failed, as the goods were received under the relevant delivery challan and invoice with store receipt endorsement, and no rule required delivery-challan-wise individual entries in RG 9 for every receipt. The inference of clandestine manufacture and removal was therefore unsupported, and the penalty and finding of clandestine removal were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83863