2014 (10) TMI 118

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal in part has been withdrawn. The error apparently has not been noticed by the Tribunal while deciding the appeal for the second time. The error as above requires to be corrected. - matter remanded back to verify and record as to whether the earlier order is supported by reasons and if so, has it been withdrawn for any reason - Decided in favour of assessee.
R. Sudhakar And G. M. Akbar Ali,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. C. A. Diwakar For the Respondents : Mr. P. Mahadevan JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.,) It is a case of import appeal filed by one of the importers. 2. It is the case of the appellants having been accused with violating the EXIM policy by importing BMW 5 series luxury cars in contraventi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the adjudicating authority from eight lakhs to six lakhs, which is in contradiction to the earlier order passed on 3.6.2009 through which the penalty was reduced to two lakhs as mentioned above. For better clarity, paragraph-8 of the order dated 10.5.2011 is extracted hereunder: "8. As such, the confiscation of the impugned vehicle and the imposition of penalties on all the three appellants who have filed the present three appeals are justified. However, considering the fact that the differential duty amount has been quantified as ₹ 11,65,453/- and that in addition there is a contravention of the EXIM Policy, we reduce the penalty imposed on Shri Namit Naresh Malhotra from ₹ 11,00,000/- to ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five la .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2,00,000/-, whereas, by the impugned order, the penalty was reduced from ₹ 8,00,000/- to ₹ 6,00,000/-. 9. We hold that there cannot be two orders by the Tribunal, with two different results. In any event, before passing the impugned order, there is no mention that the earlier order recorded on 3.6.2009 allowing the appeal in part has been withdrawn. The error apparently has not been noticed by the Tribunal while deciding the appeal for the second time. The error as above requires to be corrected. 10. In such view of the matter, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and remand the matter back to the Tribunal to verify and record as to whether the earlier order is supported by reasons and if so, has it been withdrawn for any r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X