https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211963 A mandatory penalty linked to duty or credit evaded under Rule 57-I and Section 11AC could not be reduced by the Tribunal once the statutory conditions were met, because the plain language left no discretion to dilute the prescribed consequence; the reduction was therefore set aside to that extent. By contrast, penalty under Rule 173Q was treated as discretionary as to quantum, so the reduced amount fixed under that provision was left undisturbed. The decision draws a clear distinction between mandatory penalty provisions, which must be applied as written, and discretionary penalty provisions, where appellate interference is limited absent legal error. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211963 A mandatory penalty linked to duty or credit evaded under Rule 57-I and Section 11AC could not be reduced by the Tribunal once the statutory conditions were met, because the plain language left no discretion to dilute the prescribed consequence; the reduction was therefore set aside to that extent. By contrast, penalty under Rule 173Q was treated as discretionary as to quantum, so the reduced amount fixed under that provision was left undisturbed. The decision draws a clear distinction between mandatory penalty provisions, which must be applied as written, and discretionary penalty provisions, where appellate interference is limited absent legal error. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211963