https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86507 Where PU Foam Sheets had not clearly reached the finished stage and remained inside the factory, confiscation for alleged clandestine removal was unwarranted on the facts and was set aside. On the penalty question, the only proved contravention was non-accountal, and because the stage of completion itself was disputed, the penalty was held to fall under Rule 226 rather than Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The order was therefore modified by deleting confiscation and sustaining only a reduced penalty under the provision appropriate to the proved breach. en-us Mon, 11 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Aug 2011 12:39:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86507 Where PU Foam Sheets had not clearly reached the finished stage and remained inside the factory, confiscation for alleged clandestine removal was unwarranted on the facts and was set aside. On the penalty question, the only proved contravention was non-accountal, and because the stage of completion itself was disputed, the penalty was held to fall under Rule 226 rather than Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The order was therefore modified by deleting confiscation and sustaining only a reduced penalty under the provision appropriate to the proved breach. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 11 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86507