https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53363 Rule 96ZQ(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was examined on whether the penalty for delayed duty payment by an independent processor is mandatory in the full amount of outstanding duty or only a maximum that may be moderated. The Tribunal applied the principle that a provision fixing penalty in definite terms may still operate as an upper limit, depending on its wording and context, rather than requiring automatic levy in every case. It accepted that the Commissioner (Appeals) could reduce the penalty, and treated the earlier contrary view relied on by the Revenue as not displacing that approach. en-us Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:39:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53363 Rule 96ZQ(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was examined on whether the penalty for delayed duty payment by an independent processor is mandatory in the full amount of outstanding duty or only a maximum that may be moderated. The Tribunal applied the principle that a provision fixing penalty in definite terms may still operate as an upper limit, depending on its wording and context, rather than requiring automatic levy in every case. It accepted that the Commissioner (Appeals) could reduce the penalty, and treated the earlier contrary view relied on by the Revenue as not displacing that approach. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53363