Minimum statutory penalty cannot be reduced below the prescribed floor; penalty must be reconsidered within lawful limits.

Where a statute prescribes a minimum penalty, the adjudicating authority and the Tribunal lack jurisdiction to reduce it below that statutory floor. Applying earlier High Court authority, the penalty could not be fixed below the minimum under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, and the matter was remitted for fresh determination of the penalty within the permissible range. The operative principle is that the minimum penalty set by statute must be respected, and discretion cannot be exercised to go below that limit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the authorities, including the Tribunal, had jurisdiction to reduce the penalty below the minimum prescribed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis: The controversy was treated as covered by an earlier decision of the same High Court holding that the authority including the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to reduce penalty below the minimum prescribed. Applying that view, the Court held that the penalty could not be reduced below the statutory minimum. The matter was therefore sent back for fresh determination of the amount of penalty within the permissible range.

Conclusion: The authorities below could not reduce the penalty below the minimum prescribed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent that the minimum statutory limit had to be respected, and the penalty question was remitted for reconsideration within the lawful limits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes a minimum penalty, the adjudicating authority and the Tribunal lack jurisdiction to impose a penalty below that minimum.

---