https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116738 Penalties under Rule 209A must reflect a reasoned, fair and judicious exercise of quasi-judicial discretion, with a rational relationship to the facts and value of the goods involved. Penalties imposed on dealers for allegedly receiving non-duty-paid goods were considered excessive where the seized goods had low value and the order gave no reasons for extreme amounts. The plea that the goods were duty free was not accepted; however, penalties on three appellants were reduced to nominal amounts. The penalty against the appellant from whose premises no goods were seized was set aside. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:13:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116738 Penalties under Rule 209A must reflect a reasoned, fair and judicious exercise of quasi-judicial discretion, with a rational relationship to the facts and value of the goods involved. Penalties imposed on dealers for allegedly receiving non-duty-paid goods were considered excessive where the seized goods had low value and the order gave no reasons for extreme amounts. The plea that the goods were duty free was not accepted; however, penalties on three appellants were reduced to nominal amounts. The penalty against the appellant from whose premises no goods were seized was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116738