<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (9) TMI 155 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52067</link>
    <description>Non-accountal of excisable finished goods in statutory records can attract confiscation and penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The text notes that goods found in excess of recorded stock were admittedly not entered in the prescribed books, and that authorities cited by the assessee were distinguishable on facts because they involved private records, same-day production explanations, or non-excisable goods. It further states that binding High Court decisions treat such non-accountal as sufficient for confiscation and penalty, and that absence of mens rea does not bar those consequences in this class of contravention. The order was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:50:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90545" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 155 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52067</link>
      <description>Non-accountal of excisable finished goods in statutory records can attract confiscation and penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The text notes that goods found in excess of recorded stock were admittedly not entered in the prescribed books, and that authorities cited by the assessee were distinguishable on facts because they involved private records, same-day production explanations, or non-excisable goods. It further states that binding High Court decisions treat such non-accountal as sufficient for confiscation and penalty, and that absence of mens rea does not bar those consequences in this class of contravention. The order was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>