https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46535 A settled Supreme Court interpretation of similar penalty wording under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act meant the provision fixed only the maximum penalty and preserved discretion to impose a lesser penalty. Because that legal position had already been accepted by the departmental authorities and the Tribunal, the proposed question of law was treated as concluded and did not warrant a reference to the Court. The reference application was therefore liable to be rejected, with no referable question of law surviving on the penalty issue. en-us Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:17:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46535 A settled Supreme Court interpretation of similar penalty wording under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act meant the provision fixed only the maximum penalty and preserved discretion to impose a lesser penalty. Because that legal position had already been accepted by the departmental authorities and the Tribunal, the proposed question of law was treated as concluded and did not warrant a reference to the Court. The reference application was therefore liable to be rejected, with no referable question of law surviving on the penalty issue. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46535