https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119882 Confiscation of excess raw material stock and penalty under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held unsustainable where finished goods tallied with statutory records, there was no evidence of clandestine activity or excess Modvat credit, and the excess raw material had a plausible explanation. Mere excess in raw material stock did not by itself create duty liability. The order was also deficient because it did not specify the particular sub-rule breached under Rule 173Q. On these facts, confiscation of the raw materials and the penalty could not be justified. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:43:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119882 Confiscation of excess raw material stock and penalty under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held unsustainable where finished goods tallied with statutory records, there was no evidence of clandestine activity or excess Modvat credit, and the excess raw material had a plausible explanation. Mere excess in raw material stock did not by itself create duty liability. The order was also deficient because it did not specify the particular sub-rule breached under Rule 173Q. On these facts, confiscation of the raw materials and the penalty could not be justified. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119882