https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76792 An appellate order reducing individual penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules was not interfered with because the Tribunal had dealt with the merits, sustained the findings on duty, interest and penalty against the firm, and only exercised discretion on the quantum imposed on the individuals. The High Court held that the order was not rendered invalid merely because it was not elaborate, since the Tribunal had addressed the material issues and the penalty provision conferred discretion up to the prescribed ceiling. The challenge based on absence of reasons and non-application of mind was rejected, and no substantial question of law was found. en-us Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76792 An appellate order reducing individual penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules was not interfered with because the Tribunal had dealt with the merits, sustained the findings on duty, interest and penalty against the firm, and only exercised discretion on the quantum imposed on the individuals. The High Court held that the order was not rendered invalid merely because it was not elaborate, since the Tribunal had addressed the material issues and the penalty provision conferred discretion up to the prescribed ceiling. The challenge based on absence of reasons and non-application of mind was rejected, and no substantial question of law was found. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76792