https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216650 Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was examined for imposing a mandatory minimum penalty without discretion and without regard to the extent or circumstances of delay. The Court treated penalty under the rule-making power as requiring a basis connected to evasion and held that a fixed penalty applicable in every default, including minor or bona fide delay, was unreasonable and arbitrary. It was therefore ultra vires to that extent because it removed meaningful discretion and ignored proportionality. The assessee succeeded, and the reduced penalty was upheld against the revenue's challenge. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Mar 2013 18:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216650 Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was examined for imposing a mandatory minimum penalty without discretion and without regard to the extent or circumstances of delay. The Court treated penalty under the rule-making power as requiring a basis connected to evasion and held that a fixed penalty applicable in every default, including minor or bona fide delay, was unreasonable and arbitrary. It was therefore ultra vires to that extent because it removed meaningful discretion and ignored proportionality. The assessee succeeded, and the reduced penalty was upheld against the revenue's challenge. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216650