https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83819 Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules was unwarranted where duty had been tendered through the approved collecting bank and credited, but a later bank date entry created only an apparent shortage in the PLA. The record showed that the cheque was received by the bank and credited on an earlier date, the discrepancy in the Bank of Maharashtra entry remained unexplained, and the approved collecting bank acted as the Department's agent for duty collection. The available balance in RG 23 Part-II also supported the absence of intentional evasion or improper clearance, so the penalty was set aside. en-us Tue, 18 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:44:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83819 Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules was unwarranted where duty had been tendered through the approved collecting bank and credited, but a later bank date entry created only an apparent shortage in the PLA. The record showed that the cheque was received by the bank and credited on an earlier date, the discrepancy in the Bank of Maharashtra entry remained unexplained, and the approved collecting bank acted as the Department's agent for duty collection. The available balance in RG 23 Part-II also supported the absence of intentional evasion or improper clearance, so the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83819