https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110038 Non-accountal of finished goods can attract confiscation, redemption fine and penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(b) even where no mens rea to clandestinely remove the goods is shown. The commentary notes that the Commissioner (Appeals) had relied on Tribunal rulings to set aside the penalties for want of intent, but binding High Court authority took precedence and held that mens rea is not required for invoking the rule in cases of non-accountal. On that basis, the appellate order setting aside confiscation and redemption fine was not sustainable, and restoration of the Revenue's order was upheld. en-us Mon, 13 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:03:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110038 Non-accountal of finished goods can attract confiscation, redemption fine and penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(b) even where no mens rea to clandestinely remove the goods is shown. The commentary notes that the Commissioner (Appeals) had relied on Tribunal rulings to set aside the penalties for want of intent, but binding High Court authority took precedence and held that mens rea is not required for invoking the rule in cases of non-accountal. On that basis, the appellate order setting aside confiscation and redemption fine was not sustainable, and restoration of the Revenue's order was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110038