TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be sustained when the goods were not held liable to confiscation.
Analysis: Penalty under Rule 173Q is attracted only where the goods are liable to confiscation. The show cause notice did not propose confiscation and the goods were admittedly not held liable to confiscation. In that situation, the precondition for invoking the penal provision was absent.
Conclusion: Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not sustainable and was set aside, in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Penalty under Rule 173Q cannot be imposed unless the goods are liable to confiscation.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
