https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203973 Defective, non-marketable confiscated goods were not required to be entered in statutory records as finished goods intended for clearance and sale, because their character and intended destruction under excise law took them outside that treatment. Penalty could also not be imposed on the Director under Rule 209A where there was no substantial evidence of his involvement in the company's alleged duty evasion. The Tribunal's findings on both points were sustained, and the Revenue's challenge failed on that aspect. en-us Mon, 27 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203973 Defective, non-marketable confiscated goods were not required to be entered in statutory records as finished goods intended for clearance and sale, because their character and intended destruction under excise law took them outside that treatment. Penalty could also not be imposed on the Director under Rule 209A where there was no substantial evidence of his involvement in the company's alleged duty evasion. The Tribunal's findings on both points were sustained, and the Revenue's challenge failed on that aspect. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203973