https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117662 A fiscal rule separately imposing interest and penalty for delayed duty payment was treated as creating distinct civil liabilities, so the levy of both did not attract the constitutional bar against double jeopardy. The penalty was also left undisturbed because the appellate authority had already exercised leniency by reducing it from the maximum amount to Rs. 50,000, and no basis was shown to interfere with that discretion. The challenge to the reduced penalty was therefore rejected, and the appellate order was upheld. en-us Mon, 13 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:42:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117662 A fiscal rule separately imposing interest and penalty for delayed duty payment was treated as creating distinct civil liabilities, so the levy of both did not attract the constitutional bar against double jeopardy. The penalty was also left undisturbed because the appellate authority had already exercised leniency by reducing it from the maximum amount to Rs. 50,000, and no basis was shown to interfere with that discretion. The challenge to the reduced penalty was therefore rejected, and the appellate order was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117662