9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings on the orders of the Tribunal. Question of challenging enhancement of penalty does not arise in a case of this nature, where the adjudication order itself has been set aside in its entirety and the matter remanded back to the original authority for re-adjudication, namely de-novo enquiry. - Decided against assessee. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MD) No. 618 of 2012 , M. P. (MD) No. 1 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 2-9-2015 - R. Sudhakar And V. M. Velumani, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. S. Renganathan For the Respondents : Mr. R. Aravindan JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Sudhakar,J) The premises of the appellant firm was inspected by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, during which it was fou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 14.10.2004. (i) I hold that the 16numbers of second hand printing machinery (CIF) Value ₹ 36,06,557/- imported vide various Bills of Entry through Tuticorin port and sold to various parties by M/s.Mehta Fine Arts, Sivakasi are liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962. (ii) I impose a penalty of ₹ 4,50,000/0 (Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) I order that the amount of ₹ 75,000/- paid as pre deposit may be adjusted against the dues as above. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide order dated 05.03.2012, rejected the appeal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. When the matter came-up for hearing today, we heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue. 5. There is no bar on the adjudicating authority, in a de-novo proceedings, to determine the quantum of fine or penalty. The fine and penalty imposed has been set aside and the matter is live for re- adjudication. Hence earlier order imposing fine or penalty does not have any relevance. The adjudicating authority, at its discretion, may impose appropriate fine or penalty. It does not matter whether the proceedings have been initiated afresh or heard by way of de-novo proceedings on the orders of the Tribunal. Question of challenging enhancement of penalty does not arise in a case of this nature, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
