2012 (6) TMI 225

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r Respondent:  SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,S.C.   J U D G M E N T   Ramachandran Nair, J   Heard the counsel for the appellant and Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, Standing Counsel for respondents.   2. After hearing both sides and after going through the impugned orders of the Tribunal and the lower authorities, what we notice is that the allegation that led to levy .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... also followed the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case reported in Om Prakash Bhatia v. CCE, Delhi -2003 (155) ELT 423. 3. In view of violation of S.113 leading to consequent confiscation u/s 113, penalty is levied under S. 114 of the Customs Act. However, counsel for the appellant submitted that penalty is based on estimation of value based on market enquiry. Considering .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X