https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51384 Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as discretionary in quantum, so the maximum penalty was not required in every case. Where the assessee paid the monthly duty belatedly but also paid interest, and acted under a bona fide belief based on past practice and the pre-amendment compliance mode, reduction of penalty was justified. The penalty was therefore reduced to Rs. 20,000, while the rest of the adjudication remained undisturbed. en-us Mon, 20 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 14:17:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51384 Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as discretionary in quantum, so the maximum penalty was not required in every case. Where the assessee paid the monthly duty belatedly but also paid interest, and acted under a bona fide belief based on past practice and the pre-amendment compliance mode, reduction of penalty was justified. The penalty was therefore reduced to Rs. 20,000, while the rest of the adjudication remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51384