Section 9 in The Medicinal And Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1955
9. Time and manner of payment of duty.
(1)No dutiable goods shall be removed from any place where they are manufactured or any premises appurtenant thereto, which may be specified by the Excise Commissioner in this behalf, whether for consumption, export or manufacture of any other commodity in or outside such place, until the excise duty leviable thereon has been paid at such p[lace and in such manner as is prescribed in these rules or as the Excise Commissioner may require :Provided that such goods may be deposited without payment of duty in a warehouse or may be exported out of India under bond as provided in rule 97.Provided further that the Excise Commissioner may, if he thinks fit, instead of requiring payment of duty in respect of each separate consignment of goods removed from the place or premises specified in this behalf; or from a warehouse keep with any person dealing in such goods an account-current of the duties payable thereon and such account shall be settled at intervals not exceeding three months, and the account-holder shall periodically deposit a sum therein sufficient in the opinion of the Excise Commissioner to cover the duty on the goods intended to be removed from the place of manufacture or storage.(2)If any dutiable goods are, in contravention of sub-rule (1) deposited in, or removed from, any place specified therein the manufacturer thereof shall pay the duty leviable on such goods upon written demand made by the proper officer, whether such demand is delivered personally to him or is left at the manufactory or his dwelling-house, and he shall also be liable to a penalty to be determined by the Excise Commissioner which may extend to two thousand rupees, and such goods shall also be liable to confiscation.Scope of. - Rule 9(2) of the Rules provides for the imposition of penalty and confiscation of the goods if removed without payment of excise duty in contravention of sub-rule (1). In N.B. Sanjana V. Elphinstone Spinning and Weaving Mills Co., Ltd., A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 2039 it has been laid down by the Supreme Court that in the order to attract sub-rule (2) of rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, which is the same as sub-rule (2) or rule 9 of the Rules, the goods should have been removed clandestinely and without assessment. There is no allegation in the instant case that the respondent had clandestinely removed the goods from its manufactory. On the contrary, it is not disputed that the goods were removed on the basis of applications made by the respondent in A.R. 2 forms on payment of duty assessed by the Excise Officer. There is, therefore, no question of clandestine removal of the good and, accordingly. rule 9(2) will have no application.[*] [State of West Bengal v. Bio-Drug. Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.; 87 C.W.N. 245 at Page 285]
