https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84118 Removal of inputs for processing under Rule 57F(2) had to comply with prescribed vouchers and proper accountal, and goods moved without challans and without due records were liable to confiscation. Penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained against a job worker who was neither the manufacturer nor the licence holder, and no basis for such liability was established. Separate penalties on a proprietary concern and its proprietor were unwarranted because the concern had no separate legal existence, while personal liability of another individual was supported by evidence of knowledge and participation in removal without vouchers; that penalty was reduced rather than fully upheld. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:02:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84118 Removal of inputs for processing under Rule 57F(2) had to comply with prescribed vouchers and proper accountal, and goods moved without challans and without due records were liable to confiscation. Penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained against a job worker who was neither the manufacturer nor the licence holder, and no basis for such liability was established. Separate penalties on a proprietary concern and its proprietor were unwarranted because the concern had no separate legal existence, while personal liability of another individual was supported by evidence of knowledge and participation in removal without vouchers; that penalty was reduced rather than fully upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84118