https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167531 The penalties imposed under Rules 9(2) and 52(A) for unauthorized removal of sugar without proper documentation were set aside. However, the penalty under Rule 226 for improper account maintenance was upheld. The penalty under Rule 173Q was reduced to Rs. 4,000 due to the appellant's clean record and the seriousness of breaching trust in the Self Removal Procedure. The judgment clarified that Chapter VII-A does not override general provisions of the Act and Rules, emphasizing that Rule 173A only prevails in case of conflicts between provisions. 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 The penalties imposed under Rules 9(2) and 52(A) for unauthorized removal of sugar without proper documentation were set aside. However, the penalty under Rule 226 for improper account maintenance was upheld. The penalty under Rule 173Q was reduced to Rs. 4,000 due to the appellant's clean record and the seriousness of breaching trust in the Self Removal Procedure. The judgment clarified that Chapter VII-A does not override general provisions of the Act and Rules, emphasizing that Rule 173A only prevails in case of conflicts between provisions. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167531