https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89517 Rule 174(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was construed as confining revocation or suspension of registration to breach of the conditions attached to the registration scheme itself. The reference provision "these rules" was read in context as referring to the conditions and sub-rules governing registration under Rule 174, not to every rule in the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that interpretation, breach of Rule 57GG did not justify revocation or suspension of registration under Rule 174(11). The Tribunal also held that no referable question of law arose on the department's application, and the request for reference was rejected. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:53:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89517 Rule 174(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was construed as confining revocation or suspension of registration to breach of the conditions attached to the registration scheme itself. The reference provision "these rules" was read in context as referring to the conditions and sub-rules governing registration under Rule 174, not to every rule in the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that interpretation, breach of Rule 57GG did not justify revocation or suspension of registration under Rule 174(11). The Tribunal also held that no referable question of law arose on the department's application, and the request for reference was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89517