https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107042 Penalty for breach of a procedural time limit on removal of goods sent for repairs or reconditioning was held not to be automatic where the default was technical and there was no finding of intent to evade duty. Rule 210 was treated as a residuary penalty provision, but the analysis emphasised that penal consequences depend on the nature of the breach, the absence of confiscability, and the curative and deterrent purpose of penalty. On those facts, the penalty was set aside and the assessee succeeded. en-us Fri, 27 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:50:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107042 Penalty for breach of a procedural time limit on removal of goods sent for repairs or reconditioning was held not to be automatic where the default was technical and there was no finding of intent to evade duty. Rule 210 was treated as a residuary penalty provision, but the analysis emphasised that penal consequences depend on the nature of the breach, the absence of confiscability, and the curative and deterrent purpose of penalty. On those facts, the penalty was set aside and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107042