https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52393 Non-entry of goods in RG 1 at the time of visit was treated as a technical lapse where the facts showed a closed day, pending production entries, and duty payment clearance already debited. On that basis, the omission did not prove intent to evade duty or conscious disregard of legal obligations, so confiscation, redemption fine and penalty under the stricter provision were not justified. The Tribunal noted that, if any penalty were considered, it would lie only under the lesser penal provision, because mere non-accountal without contumacious conduct does not attract the harsher consequences. en-us Fri, 24 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Oct 2010 15:41:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52393 Non-entry of goods in RG 1 at the time of visit was treated as a technical lapse where the facts showed a closed day, pending production entries, and duty payment clearance already debited. On that basis, the omission did not prove intent to evade duty or conscious disregard of legal obligations, so confiscation, redemption fine and penalty under the stricter provision were not justified. The Tribunal noted that, if any penalty were considered, it would lie only under the lesser penal provision, because mere non-accountal without contumacious conduct does not attract the harsher consequences. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52393