https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111404 Breach of Central Excise procedural requirements justified confiscation of the goods and appropriation of the duty already paid towards the duty liability. The goods had been cleared contrary to Rules 52A, 9(1), 173G, 224 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, so confiscation was sustained. However, the absence of a deliberate attempt to evade duty was treated as a mitigating factor, and no penalty was imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On that basis, the redemption fine and the penalty under Rule 173Q were substantially reduced, granting partial relief to the assessee. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:36:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111404 Breach of Central Excise procedural requirements justified confiscation of the goods and appropriation of the duty already paid towards the duty liability. The goods had been cleared contrary to Rules 52A, 9(1), 173G, 224 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, so confiscation was sustained. However, the absence of a deliberate attempt to evade duty was treated as a mitigating factor, and no penalty was imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On that basis, the redemption fine and the penalty under Rule 173Q were substantially reduced, granting partial relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111404