9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Import of used tyres without following prescribed procedures as per DGFT Notification. Analysis: The appeal was against an order-in-appeal regarding the import of used tyres without following prescribed procedures. The respondents participated in the adjudication proceedings after being served a show cause notice. The original authority confiscated the goods but allowed their release on payment of redemption fine and imposed a penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) considered the waiver of pre-deposit of redemption fine and penalty. The Commissioner reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 1,00,000 and the personal penalty to Rs. 40,000, citing lack of proper market verification and determination of margin of profit by the original authority. The Commissioner found the imposition of fine and penalty excessive and made modifications based on documentary evidence and lack of proper enquiry into market value and MOP. The revenue contended that the Commissioner should not have reduced the redemption fine and penalty. However, the appellate tribunal held that the Commissioner considered the documentary evidence and concluded that the original adjudicating authority's imposition of fine and penalty was excessive. The tribunal noted that the imposition of redemption fine and penalty is discretionary and depends on the facts and circumstances of the case. In this case, the tribunal found that the Commissioner was correct in reducing the redemption fine and penalty due to lack of proper market value determination and arbitrary imposition by the original authority. Therefore, the tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the revenue, upholding the Commissioner's decision to reduce the redemption fine and penalty.
|
