Specific contravention and wilful conduct are essential before imposing penalty for invoice discrepancies under excise rules.

Penalty under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be sustained because the show-cause notice and adjudication order did not specify the exact sub-clause invoked and did not record a finding of wilful entry of wrong or incorrect particulars in the invoices. The alleged invoice discrepancies were not clearly linked to the shortages at the buyer's premises, and the requisite element of wilful contravention for clause (bbb) was absent. The impugned penalty order was therefore set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was sustainable when neither the show-cause notice nor the adjudication order specified the exact sub-clause and no finding of wilful entry of wrong or incorrect particulars in the invoice was recorded.

Analysis: The penalty was imposed on the basis of discrepancies in duplicate and quadruplicate copies of invoices, but the notice itself did not clearly connect the alleged shortages at the buyer's premises with the particular invoices in which the discrepancies were found. The adjudicating authority also did not record a finding that the appellants had wilfully entered wrong or incorrect particulars in the invoices with intent to facilitate wrongful availment of credit. For penalty under clause (bbb) of Rule 173Q(1), the element of wilful conduct and the precise nature of contravention had to be identified. In the absence of a specific clause being invoked and in the absence of a supporting finding, the penalty could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The penalty was not leviable and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded because the punitive order lacked a specific charge and the necessary finding of wilful contravention required for imposition of penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty under Rule 173Q(1) cannot be sustained unless the exact contravention is specifically alleged and found, particularly where wilful conduct is the foundation of the penal clause.

---