https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50309 Absence of duty evasion and only minor defects in record maintenance did not justify invoking the harsher penal provision. The assessee's explanation was accepted, and the breach was confined to non-maintenance of the prescribed register and failure to give D-III intimation. On that basis, the matter fell only within the procedural penalty provision, and the penalty could be sustained solely under Rule 226, subject to its limited maximum. Rule 173Q was held inapplicable where the violation was procedural and no duty evasion was found. en-us Wed, 27 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50309 Absence of duty evasion and only minor defects in record maintenance did not justify invoking the harsher penal provision. The assessee's explanation was accepted, and the breach was confined to non-maintenance of the prescribed register and failure to give D-III intimation. On that basis, the matter fell only within the procedural penalty provision, and the penalty could be sustained solely under Rule 226, subject to its limited maximum. Rule 173Q was held inapplicable where the violation was procedural and no duty evasion was found. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50309