https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110255 Contravention of Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by receiving duty-paid goods back after repair beyond the prescribed period without permission attracted only the penalty linked to that breach. Rule 173Q, which governs removal-related defaults, could not be used to impose a higher penalty because it did not correspond to the nature of the contravention. The applicable penalty was confined to the limited maximum prescribed under Rule 210, and the penalty was therefore restricted to that provision rather than enhanced under Rule 173Q. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:42:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110255 Contravention of Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by receiving duty-paid goods back after repair beyond the prescribed period without permission attracted only the penalty linked to that breach. Rule 173Q, which governs removal-related defaults, could not be used to impose a higher penalty because it did not correspond to the nature of the contravention. The applicable penalty was confined to the limited maximum prescribed under Rule 210, and the penalty was therefore restricted to that provision rather than enhanced under Rule 173Q. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110255