https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116176 Rule 173GG(3) prescribed a fixed daily penalty for delayed duty payment, and the proviso operated only as a ceiling on the aggregate of duty, interest and penalty. On that construction, the daily penalty was the minimum mandatory liability, so neither the adjudicating authority nor the Tribunal had discretion to reduce it below the prescribed amount. The reference to Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act did not alter that position, and the cited precedent supported the same interpretation. The penalty was therefore sustained in full, with no discretionary reduction permissible. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:52:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116176 Rule 173GG(3) prescribed a fixed daily penalty for delayed duty payment, and the proviso operated only as a ceiling on the aggregate of duty, interest and penalty. On that construction, the daily penalty was the minimum mandatory liability, so neither the adjudicating authority nor the Tribunal had discretion to reduce it below the prescribed amount. The reference to Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act did not alter that position, and the cited precedent supported the same interpretation. The penalty was therefore sustained in full, with no discretionary reduction permissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116176