2001 (3) TMI 980

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he facts and circumstances relating to the imposition of the penalty in this case which amounts to Rs. 26,240. The petitioner's learned counsel did submit that having regard to the nature of the transactions and, the fact that according to the petitioner the goods were virtually being moved from the warehouse to the persons to whom they were to be entrusted for sale, namely, the dealers, that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hority, that it must be demonstrated that the discretion is correctly and judiciously exercised and that the order passed is not bereft of these factors. What is pointed out is that there is not a single word in the order justifying the imposition of a deterrent fine. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the movement of goods unaccompanied by requisite documents does ultimately resul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... again be vulnerable on the ground of arbitrariness. The petitioner's learned counsel is therefore on very sound footing when he points out to us that there is nothing to indicate that the petitioner has defaulted earlier or that the facts of the case justify exemplary punishment and that consequently, even if a penalty was awarded because these are technical breaches involving non-carriage of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X