2016 (8) TMI 1072

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o.  And Shri M.K. Mall Asstt. Commr. (A.R.) for Stonemann Marbles Inds. for Appellants None  for respondent ORDER  In all these appeals, the common issue involved is that the Revenue sought for enhancement of the redemption fine imposed by the adjudicating authority. For better understanding the chart is given below: Sr. No. Appeal Nos. Name of the Appellant Redemption fine .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sal of records.  We find that in all the cases, the fact is that the respondents have imported Marble Blocks without obtaining Special Import Licence and there is also mis-declaration of the value. We observe from the impugned order that though the redemption fine was not to the extent of margin but the penalty was substantially enhanced.  If both penalty and redemption fine are taken to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed by the adjudicating authority which is equal to the margin, no further enhancement is required. Also applying the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Stonemann Marble Industries (supra), the impugned order does not require any interference.  We, therefore upheld the impugned orders and dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue. (Pronounced  in court on  28/07/2016 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X