https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114109 Penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained where the duty demand had already been dropped and the only surviving allegation was non-maintenance of records. The CESTAT held that mere failure to keep records, without any resultant evasion of duty or intention to evade duty, did not justify the harsher penalty under Rule 173Q. Rule 226 was the provision addressing non-maintenance of records and contemplated only a lesser penalty. In the absence of proof of evasion or culpable intent, the penalty order was set aside and the appellant succeeded. en-us Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 May 2012 12:59:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114109 Penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained where the duty demand had already been dropped and the only surviving allegation was non-maintenance of records. The CESTAT held that mere failure to keep records, without any resultant evasion of duty or intention to evade duty, did not justify the harsher penalty under Rule 173Q. Rule 226 was the provision addressing non-maintenance of records and contemplated only a lesser penalty. In the absence of proof of evasion or culpable intent, the penalty order was set aside and the appellant succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114109