https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40865 Penalties for excise-rule contraventions were reconsidered in light of a classification dispute that shifted the product from dutiable to exempt treatment and required dismantling of the bonded store room. The goods were treated as exempt from central excise duty, and no mala fides were found. Although non-maintenance of RG 1 was admitted, the circumstances did not justify penalties under Rules 9(2), 210 and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, so those penalties were remitted. The separate contravention under Rule 226 was sustained, and the redemption fine in lieu of confiscation was reduced as excessive in the circumstances. en-us Sat, 15 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 May 2010 13:38:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40865 Penalties for excise-rule contraventions were reconsidered in light of a classification dispute that shifted the product from dutiable to exempt treatment and required dismantling of the bonded store room. The goods were treated as exempt from central excise duty, and no mala fides were found. Although non-maintenance of RG 1 was admitted, the circumstances did not justify penalties under Rules 9(2), 210 and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, so those penalties were remitted. The separate contravention under Rule 226 was sustained, and the redemption fine in lieu of confiscation was reduced as excessive in the circumstances. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 15 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40865