https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100132 Excisable goods found ready for removal from the factory, but not entered in the RG-1 register and not covered by any declaration for removal for inspection, were treated as liable to confiscation. The explanation that they were being sent for inspection was rejected because the contractual arrangement required inspection to be conducted in the factory, and no permission had been obtained from the excise authorities for outward movement. On these facts, the confiscation and personal penalty were upheld, with no interference called for. en-us Thu, 31 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:54:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100132 Excisable goods found ready for removal from the factory, but not entered in the RG-1 register and not covered by any declaration for removal for inspection, were treated as liable to confiscation. The explanation that they were being sent for inspection was rejected because the contractual arrangement required inspection to be conducted in the factory, and no permission had been obtained from the excise authorities for outward movement. On these facts, the confiscation and personal penalty were upheld, with no interference called for. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 31 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100132