2009 (12) TMI 1004

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... On 2-12-2009, the following contentions of learned counsel for the appellant were noticed and learned counsel representing the respondent had sought time to go through the order passed by the CESTAT, which was upheld by this Court :- "Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the penalty under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was levied against the appellant for alleged violation 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

..... nsidering the order passed by the CESTAT as upheld by this Court it cannot possibly be said that there is violation of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and accordingly the levy of the penalty on the appellant is totally unjustified." 2. As is evident from the facts noticed above, the penalty on the appellant was levied with the allegations that he had not used the foreign exchange for the pur .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat the appellant had not challenged the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the Customs Act which was, in fact, not correct as subsequently that order was set aside by the CESTAT, as upheld by this Court. 3. Considering the aforesaid facts, the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal cannot be sustained and it is accordingly set aside. 4. The appeal stands disposed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X