https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109815 Non-accountal of excisable goods in RG 1 was treated as a contravention attracting penalty under Rule 173Q, with the higher court precedent regarded as prevailing over the Tribunal view and the merits understood in favour of the Revenue. On the interim issue, the absence of any allegation or finding of mens rea, together with the explanation that the goods were lying in the factory and no clandestine intent was shown, supported a strong prima facie case on penalty quantum. Partial relief was therefore granted: pre-deposit and recovery were waived only for the penalty amount exceeding Rs. 25,000. en-us Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 11:12:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109815 Non-accountal of excisable goods in RG 1 was treated as a contravention attracting penalty under Rule 173Q, with the higher court precedent regarded as prevailing over the Tribunal view and the merits understood in favour of the Revenue. On the interim issue, the absence of any allegation or finding of mens rea, together with the explanation that the goods were lying in the factory and no clandestine intent was shown, supported a strong prima facie case on penalty quantum. Partial relief was therefore granted: pre-deposit and recovery were waived only for the penalty amount exceeding Rs. 25,000. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109815