https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94484 Confiscation and redemption fine for alleged clandestine removal were unsustainable where the goods remained in the factory premises and there was no evidence of any attempt to clear them without payment of duty; mere non-entry in the RG-1 Register was insufficient to justify confiscation. The penalty for failure to account for production in the RG-1 Register was, however, warranted under Rule 173Q because the lapse was admitted after the goods reached the relevant inspection and grading stage. The penalty was therefore sustained but reduced as being disproportionate to the contravention. en-us Mon, 06 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:45:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94484 Confiscation and redemption fine for alleged clandestine removal were unsustainable where the goods remained in the factory premises and there was no evidence of any attempt to clear them without payment of duty; mere non-entry in the RG-1 Register was insufficient to justify confiscation. The penalty for failure to account for production in the RG-1 Register was, however, warranted under Rule 173Q because the lapse was admitted after the goods reached the relevant inspection and grading stage. The penalty was therefore sustained but reduced as being disproportionate to the contravention. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94484