https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248484 Mere non-accountal of finished excisable goods in statutory records did not, by itself, justify confiscation or penalty where the factory had been sealed by the bank and the record showed no clandestine removal, preparation for removal, or intent to evade duty. The applicable requirement for action under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was a culpable intention to remove goods clandestinely or evade duty, and that element was absent on the stated facts. The confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties were therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 09 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:18:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248484 Mere non-accountal of finished excisable goods in statutory records did not, by itself, justify confiscation or penalty where the factory had been sealed by the bank and the record showed no clandestine removal, preparation for removal, or intent to evade duty. The applicable requirement for action under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was a culpable intention to remove goods clandestinely or evade duty, and that element was absent on the stated facts. The confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248484