https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94606 Private records, corroborated statements and comparison with statutory accounts were sufficient to sustain the penalty for contravention of the Central Excise Rules, because mere retraction did not displace their evidentiary value absent proof of duress or involuntariness. The penalty under Rule 173Q(bbb) was therefore upheld. By contrast, cancellation of the dealership registration could be ordered only for breach of the conditions of registration under Rule 174 and the registration certificate, not for every statutory violation. Since breach of Rule 57GG was not by itself a ground for cancellation, the registration order was set aside. en-us Tue, 06 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:40:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94606 Private records, corroborated statements and comparison with statutory accounts were sufficient to sustain the penalty for contravention of the Central Excise Rules, because mere retraction did not displace their evidentiary value absent proof of duress or involuntariness. The penalty under Rule 173Q(bbb) was therefore upheld. By contrast, cancellation of the dealership registration could be ordered only for breach of the conditions of registration under Rule 174 and the registration certificate, not for every statutory violation. Since breach of Rule 57GG was not by itself a ground for cancellation, the registration order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94606