https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122678 Non-entry of goods in the RG-1 register was treated as a clerical lapse, not evidence of clandestine removal, because the goods were found within the factory and mens rea was not established. On that basis, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were found unwarranted. The register irregularity still attracted a limited statutory penalty under Rule 226, reflecting that procedural non-compliance could be penalised even without the harsher consequences reserved for deliberate evasion. en-us Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:47:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122678 Non-entry of goods in the RG-1 register was treated as a clerical lapse, not evidence of clandestine removal, because the goods were found within the factory and mens rea was not established. On that basis, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were found unwarranted. The register irregularity still attracted a limited statutory penalty under Rule 226, reflecting that procedural non-compliance could be penalised even without the harsher consequences reserved for deliberate evasion. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122678