https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40458 Penal action under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not stand where the excise department failed to prove, with clear and convincing material, that biri pathi tobacco had been removed and replaced with inferior tobacco. The alleged substitution was inferred only from transport and register descriptions, without evidence of the normal stem or khandi content in biri pathi tobacco or the actual composition of the seized goods. As the invoked provisions were penal in nature, proof of each ingredient was required; the findings of contravention were therefore unsustainable and the penalty, duty demand and confiscation were set aside. en-us Wed, 25 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 May 2010 13:13:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40458 Penal action under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not stand where the excise department failed to prove, with clear and convincing material, that biri pathi tobacco had been removed and replaced with inferior tobacco. The alleged substitution was inferred only from transport and register descriptions, without evidence of the normal stem or khandi content in biri pathi tobacco or the actual composition of the seized goods. As the invoked provisions were penal in nature, proof of each ingredient was required; the findings of contravention were therefore unsustainable and the penalty, duty demand and confiscation were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40458