https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49873 Penalty under Rule 209-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be sustained where the show cause notice invoked only Rule 173-Q(1) and Rule 9(2). The ingredients of Rule 173-Q(1) and Rule 209-A were different, so a notice under one provision did not give adequate opportunity to defend a charge under the other. Mere reference to penal action in the notice was insufficient when the specific provision ultimately relied on was never put to the appellant. The penalty was set aside. en-us Mon, 03 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:29:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49873 Penalty under Rule 209-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be sustained where the show cause notice invoked only Rule 173-Q(1) and Rule 9(2). The ingredients of Rule 173-Q(1) and Rule 209-A were different, so a notice under one provision did not give adequate opportunity to defend a charge under the other. Mere reference to penal action in the notice was insufficient when the specific provision ultimately relied on was never put to the appellant. The penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49873