9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of M/S. OMEX INTERNATIONAL VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI [ 2015 (4) TMI 112 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)] - The Tribunal has taken the view that redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of the value of the imported goods, would be appropriate in case of import violating Exim Policy Provisions. There are no reasons to interfere with the findings of the learned Commissioner(Appeals) on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 018, 76700 of 2018 ORDER P.K.CHOUDHARY : The Miscellaneous Applications have been filed by the Applicant/Appellant for condonation of delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. 2. In view of the reasons as mentioned in the applications, the delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal is condoned and the Miscellaneous Applications for condonation of delay are allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1962. He also imposed redemption fine under Section 125 of the Act @ 25-27% and personal penalty under section 112 (a) of the Act, varying from 15-15.2%. 4. The order passed by the original adjudicating authority was challenged before the Commissioner(Appeals) by the importer. The First Appellate Authority, by passing the impugned order, upheld the order of confiscation and enhancement of val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perusal of record, we find that the enhancement of value has been ordered by the First Appellate Authority on the basis of concurrence given by the importer for such enhancement. There is no challenge to the order of confiscation, but Revenue is challenging the quantum of redemption fine and penalty, which stand reduced by the learned Commissioner(Appeals). 7. On perusal of the impugned order, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
