https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54770 Excisable goods found in excess within the factory and not entered in the prescribed RG-I records were treated as liable to confiscation under Rule 25(1)(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The explanation that stock was maintained only on a theoretical basis and weighed at clearance was rejected because it undermined statutory record-keeping and could facilitate clandestine removals. Confiscation under the rule was held not to require proof of mens rea. The redemption fine was sustained, though reduced, and the reduced penalty was upheld. en-us Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:56:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54770 Excisable goods found in excess within the factory and not entered in the prescribed RG-I records were treated as liable to confiscation under Rule 25(1)(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The explanation that stock was maintained only on a theoretical basis and weighed at clearance was rejected because it undermined statutory record-keeping and could facilitate clandestine removals. Confiscation under the rule was held not to require proof of mens rea. The redemption fine was sustained, though reduced, and the reduced penalty was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54770