https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113651 Non-debiting of entries in RG.23A Part II or PLA and related excise-record omissions were treated as procedural lapses, not deliberate evasion, because the relevant debit numbers were already reflected in computer-generated invoices and the absence of entries was explained by staff handling difficulties. The apprehension that the entries could be destroyed was found unfounded on the facts. The contraventions were therefore characterised as technical and procedural, and confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty were held not justified. en-us Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 May 2012 14:21:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113651 Non-debiting of entries in RG.23A Part II or PLA and related excise-record omissions were treated as procedural lapses, not deliberate evasion, because the relevant debit numbers were already reflected in computer-generated invoices and the absence of entries was explained by staff handling difficulties. The apprehension that the entries could be destroyed was found unfounded on the facts. The contraventions were therefore characterised as technical and procedural, and confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty were held not justified. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113651