Penalty for invoicing unregistered goods upheld in principle, but reduced due to later registration amendment.

Invoices issued for aluminium scrap not covered by the dealer's registration certificate justified penalty under Rule 173Q, as the item was not included in the registration during the relevant period. The later addition of aluminium scrap to the certificate was treated only as a mitigating factor and did not negate liability. Penalty was therefore upheld in principle, but the Tribunal reduced the quantum on the facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Rule 173Q was warranted for issuing invoices in respect of aluminium scrap without registration of that item in the dealer's registration certificate, and if so, whether the penalty required reduction on the facts.

Analysis: The appellant was registered as a dealer for certain items, but aluminium scrap had not been included in the registration certificate during the relevant period. The item was added only after the appellant applied for inclusion. The Tribunal found no merit in the contention that no penalty was imposable, since invoices had been issued for an item not covered by the existing registration. At the same time, the subsequent inclusion of aluminium scrap in the registration certificate was treated as a relevant mitigating circumstance for quantification of penalty.

Conclusion: Penalty under Rule 173Q was upheld in principle, but it was reduced to Rs. 20,000.

---