https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47496 Penalty under Rule 96ZQ(5)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules was construed as discretionary, with the prescribed amount treated as a maximum rather than a mandatory levy. Applying an earlier Gujarat High Court view, the authority was required to consider the facts and circumstances before fixing penalty, and penalty could not be imposed merely for procedural non-compliance. The penalty order was quashed and the matter remanded for reconsideration in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:29:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47496 Penalty under Rule 96ZQ(5)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules was construed as discretionary, with the prescribed amount treated as a maximum rather than a mandatory levy. Applying an earlier Gujarat High Court view, the authority was required to consider the facts and circumstances before fixing penalty, and penalty could not be imposed merely for procedural non-compliance. The penalty order was quashed and the matter remanded for reconsideration in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47496