https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106890 Excisable goods found removed or kept unaccounted in contravention of prescribed central excise procedure were liable to duty demand and confiscation. The explanation that finished goods had been shifted to an outside godown, and that periodic RG-1 and RG 23A Part I entries were sufficient, was rejected because removal of finished goods from the factory required a central excise invoice and duty payment, and the outside godown was not treated as part of the factory. The confiscatory and penalty provisions applied to non-accounted goods, and mens rea was not required for liability under the relevant clauses. The penalty and redemption fine were found excessive and reduced. en-us Tue, 22 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 12:03:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106890 Excisable goods found removed or kept unaccounted in contravention of prescribed central excise procedure were liable to duty demand and confiscation. The explanation that finished goods had been shifted to an outside godown, and that periodic RG-1 and RG 23A Part I entries were sufficient, was rejected because removal of finished goods from the factory required a central excise invoice and duty payment, and the outside godown was not treated as part of the factory. The confiscatory and penalty provisions applied to non-accounted goods, and mens rea was not required for liability under the relevant clauses. The penalty and redemption fine were found excessive and reduced. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106890