https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167531 Overlapping central excise penalties under Rule 9(2) and Rule 52A could not be sustained alongside Rule 173Q where the same contravention was already covered by the latter, so those penalties were set aside. Penalty under Rule 226 remained independently sustainable because it addressed a distinct default in account maintenance and attempted erasures and was not displaced by Rule 173Q. The penalty under Rule 173Q was reduced because the duty involved was small and there was a long offence-free record, making the original amount excessive in the circumstances. The result was partial success: overlapping penalties were annulled, the independent penalty was maintained, and the Rule 173Q penalty was scaled down. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:56:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167531 Overlapping central excise penalties under Rule 9(2) and Rule 52A could not be sustained alongside Rule 173Q where the same contravention was already covered by the latter, so those penalties were set aside. Penalty under Rule 226 remained independently sustainable because it addressed a distinct default in account maintenance and attempted erasures and was not displaced by Rule 173Q. The penalty under Rule 173Q was reduced because the duty involved was small and there was a long offence-free record, making the original amount excessive in the circumstances. The result was partial success: overlapping penalties were annulled, the independent penalty was maintained, and the Rule 173Q penalty was scaled down. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167531