https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204237 Penalty for default in duty payment under Rule 96ZP(3) was held not to operate as an automatic mandatory levy at the full defaulted amount in every case. The Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority retained discretion to quantify penalty judiciously on the facts, especially where the Supreme Court had not conclusively upheld the rule's constitutional validity and the High Court had treated a minimum mandatory penalty without mens rea as excessive and arbitrary. Finding no material to establish mens rea or wilful default, and noting that duty with interest had been paid before the show cause notices, the Tribunal upheld the reduced penalty as a reasoned exercise of discretion. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204237 Penalty for default in duty payment under Rule 96ZP(3) was held not to operate as an automatic mandatory levy at the full defaulted amount in every case. The Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority retained discretion to quantify penalty judiciously on the facts, especially where the Supreme Court had not conclusively upheld the rule's constitutional validity and the High Court had treated a minimum mandatory penalty without mens rea as excessive and arbitrary. Finding no material to establish mens rea or wilful default, and noting that duty with interest had been paid before the show cause notices, the Tribunal upheld the reduced penalty as a reasoned exercise of discretion. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204237