https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119574 Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be sustained because the show cause notice and the adjudication order failed to specify the exact clause or sub-rule allegedly contravened. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that penalty proceedings must give clear notice of the precise basis of liability, especially where Rule 173Q contains distinct clauses carrying different consequences. In the absence of such specification, the foundational notice was vague and the penalty failed. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:14:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119574 Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be sustained because the show cause notice and the adjudication order failed to specify the exact clause or sub-rule allegedly contravened. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that penalty proceedings must give clear notice of the precise basis of liability, especially where Rule 173Q contains distinct clauses carrying different consequences. In the absence of such specification, the foundational notice was vague and the penalty failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119574