(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.19 OF 2009 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.19 OF 2009 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.19 OF 2009 The commissioner of Central Excise ...Appellant. Vs. M/s.Madhuri Travels, Pune ...Respondents. Mr.Suresh Kumar , adv. for the Appellant. Mr.Ricab Chand , adv. for the Respondents. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATED: 21ST APRIL, 2009. DATED: 21ST APRIL, 2009. DATED: 21ST APRIL, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Revenue has come in appeal on the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble CESTAT is justified in reducing the penalty in the case of the Respondent who has not been able to prove that there was reasonable cause for the failure ? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble CESTAT is justified in reducing the penalty to the level below the minimum penalty prescribed under the law, which comes to Rs.40,364/-? Before the Tribunal, the only issue canvassed was whether the Commissioner (Appeals) has a power to reduce the penalty imposed under Section 76. Question as now framed, therefore, would not arise from the order of the Tribunal. Even otherwise (-2-) considering Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, it is clear that there is power in the authority on showing reasonable cause, not to impose penalty or reduce the amount of penalty. That issue is fairly covered by the order of this Court in Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nashik v. D.R.Gade of Central Excise & Customs, Nashik v. D.R.Gade of Central Excise & Customs, Nashik v. D.R.Gade 2008(9) S.T.R. 348 (Bom.). 2008(9) S.T.R. 348 (Bom.). 2008(9) S.T.R. 348 (Bom.). 2. Considering the above, there is no merit in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)