https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94914 Mere non-entry of manufactured goods in the RG-1 register, without any allegation of removal or attempted removal with intent to evade duty, does not justify confiscation or penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The procedural lapse may still attract limited action under Rule 226 where goods are not recorded in the statutory register, but the breach is treated as technical rather than substantive. On that basis, the harsher consequences were reduced: the penalty and redemption fine were scaled down, and confiscation of plant and machinery was set aside. The operative distinction is between an evasion-linked contravention and a record-keeping default. en-us Fri, 22 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:37:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94914 Mere non-entry of manufactured goods in the RG-1 register, without any allegation of removal or attempted removal with intent to evade duty, does not justify confiscation or penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The procedural lapse may still attract limited action under Rule 226 where goods are not recorded in the statutory register, but the breach is treated as technical rather than substantive. On that basis, the harsher consequences were reduced: the penalty and redemption fine were scaled down, and confiscation of plant and machinery was set aside. The operative distinction is between an evasion-linked contravention and a record-keeping default. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94914