https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96374 Procedural omissions in excise records do not automatically attract confiscation or harsher penalty where the credit is otherwise accepted and no wrongful availment is shown. Failure to enter input particulars in Part I of RG 23A, by itself, was treated as insufficient for penalty or confiscation when the credit stood reflected in Part II. A temporary lapse in production records for about ten days was also treated as a procedural default, not a case of intent to evade duty, so Rule 173Q was held inapplicable and only a lesser procedural provision was considered. Penalties on employees and confiscation of plant and machinery were set aside as disproportionate on the facts. en-us Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:40:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96374 Procedural omissions in excise records do not automatically attract confiscation or harsher penalty where the credit is otherwise accepted and no wrongful availment is shown. Failure to enter input particulars in Part I of RG 23A, by itself, was treated as insufficient for penalty or confiscation when the credit stood reflected in Part II. A temporary lapse in production records for about ten days was also treated as a procedural default, not a case of intent to evade duty, so Rule 173Q was held inapplicable and only a lesser procedural provision was considered. Penalties on employees and confiscation of plant and machinery were set aside as disproportionate on the facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96374