https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107361 A brief, satisfactorily explained delay in payment of central excise duty was treated as insufficient to justify a penalty equal to duty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The delay was only two days, arose from bank holidays, and the duty was paid on the next working day; the explanation had been accepted and interest remained payable. In these circumstances, the excessive penalty was reduced to the mandatory minimum prescribed under the rule, showing that while the minimum penalty requirement was treated as binding, residual discretion on quantum had to be exercised reasonably and proportionately. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Mar 2012 18:27:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107361 A brief, satisfactorily explained delay in payment of central excise duty was treated as insufficient to justify a penalty equal to duty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The delay was only two days, arose from bank holidays, and the duty was paid on the next working day; the explanation had been accepted and interest remained payable. In these circumstances, the excessive penalty was reduced to the mandatory minimum prescribed under the rule, showing that while the minimum penalty requirement was treated as binding, residual discretion on quantum had to be exercised reasonably and proportionately. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107361