https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351961 Unaccounted finished goods found within the factory were treated as liable to confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and the connected redemption fine and penalty on the company were upheld because the goods were not entered in the statutory records. By contrast, the personal penalty on the director under Rule 26 was set aside because he was found to be connected with a different company and no demonstrable nexus with the appellant company's offending conduct was shown. The document states the settled principle that confiscation may follow from unaccounted goods in the factory, but personal penalty requires a clear link between the individual and the impugned activity. en-us Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Dec 2017 07:54:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351961 Unaccounted finished goods found within the factory were treated as liable to confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and the connected redemption fine and penalty on the company were upheld because the goods were not entered in the statutory records. By contrast, the personal penalty on the director under Rule 26 was set aside because he was found to be connected with a different company and no demonstrable nexus with the appellant company's offending conduct was shown. The document states the settled principle that confiscation may follow from unaccounted goods in the factory, but personal penalty requires a clear link between the individual and the impugned activity. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351961