https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97970 Mere non-accountal of excisable finished goods and raw materials in statutory records, without evidence of clandestine removal or an attempt to remove the goods surreptitiously, did not justify confiscation. The excess goods were found in the factory premises, and no loaded vehicle or other material indicated illicit removal, so confiscation was set aside. For simple non-accountal, the proper penal provision was Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules, and the harsher confiscatory provision could not be used. The penalty was therefore reduced to the maximum permissible under Rule 226, reflecting strict construction of penal provisions and application only within their prescribed limits. en-us Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:00:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97970 Mere non-accountal of excisable finished goods and raw materials in statutory records, without evidence of clandestine removal or an attempt to remove the goods surreptitiously, did not justify confiscation. The excess goods were found in the factory premises, and no loaded vehicle or other material indicated illicit removal, so confiscation was set aside. For simple non-accountal, the proper penal provision was Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules, and the harsher confiscatory provision could not be used. The penalty was therefore reduced to the maximum permissible under Rule 226, reflecting strict construction of penal provisions and application only within their prescribed limits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97970