https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33928 Where the Customs Act fixes only the maximum limit for redemption fine under Section 125 and penalty under Section 112(a), the Tribunal may lawfully reduce the quantified amounts within its discretion. The Madras HC held that interference is warranted only if the exercise of discretion is shown to be arbitrary, whimsical, perverse, or causing miscarriage of justice. As the Tribunal followed its earlier percentage-based approach and no material showed arbitrary reduction, the fine and penalty were upheld and no substantial question of law arose in favour of the Revenue. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33928 Where the Customs Act fixes only the maximum limit for redemption fine under Section 125 and penalty under Section 112(a), the Tribunal may lawfully reduce the quantified amounts within its discretion. The Madras HC held that interference is warranted only if the exercise of discretion is shown to be arbitrary, whimsical, perverse, or causing miscarriage of justice. As the Tribunal followed its earlier percentage-based approach and no material showed arbitrary reduction, the fine and penalty were upheld and no substantial question of law arose in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33928