https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110181 Unauthorised removal of inputs for processing without the permission and accounting required by Rule 57F(3) was treated as a substantive breach of the Modvat scheme, not a mere technical lapse, so adverse action including denial of credit, confiscation, duty demand and related consequences was justified in principle. The shortage of part of the inputs reinforced that finding. However, penal consequences were moderated: penalties on employees were reduced as personal gain was not shown, and the proprietor's penalty was set aside where the firm had already been proceeded against. Redemption fine was also reduced in part. en-us Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 11:17:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110181 Unauthorised removal of inputs for processing without the permission and accounting required by Rule 57F(3) was treated as a substantive breach of the Modvat scheme, not a mere technical lapse, so adverse action including denial of credit, confiscation, duty demand and related consequences was justified in principle. The shortage of part of the inputs reinforced that finding. However, penal consequences were moderated: penalties on employees were reduced as personal gain was not shown, and the proprietor's penalty was set aside where the firm had already been proceeded against. Redemption fine was also reduced in part. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110181