https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248330 Non-entry of excess raw material and finished excisable goods in statutory records was viewed by one member as insufficient by itself to prove non-accountal or clandestine removal, so confiscation and penalty were not warranted absent evidence of mala fide intent to evade duty. The other member held that goods not regularly entered in the daily stock account were not satisfactorily accounted for and fell within Rule 25, making confiscation and penalty permissible, though the redemption fine and penalty were excessive. The text records a divergence of opinion on liability to confiscation and penalty, with no final majority conclusion stated. en-us Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Sep 2014 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248330 Non-entry of excess raw material and finished excisable goods in statutory records was viewed by one member as insufficient by itself to prove non-accountal or clandestine removal, so confiscation and penalty were not warranted absent evidence of mala fide intent to evade duty. The other member held that goods not regularly entered in the daily stock account were not satisfactorily accounted for and fell within Rule 25, making confiscation and penalty permissible, though the redemption fine and penalty were excessive. The text records a divergence of opinion on liability to confiscation and penalty, with no final majority conclusion stated. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248330