2007 (12) TMI 234

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s are filed by the Commissioner of Customs questioning the correctness of the common order dated 18-4-2007 passed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, whereby, the penalty imposed has been marginally reduced, as stated in the order, in respect of the first respondent in each of these appeals. 2. The respective first respondent in these C.M.As. filed appeals against the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e learned Commissioner imposed penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, against the appellants. The Commissioner held that since the goods had been released on bond and have not been confiscated, the imposition of penalty was in order; consequently, marginally reduced the penalty. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), the respective first respondent in these .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at the penalty should not exceed the value of the goods. Hence, we do not find any irregularity in the order of the Tribunal in reducing the penalty marginally, in the absence of any statutory restriction or prescription. Hence, we are of the view that there is no question of law, much less substantial question of law arising for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, these appeals are dismi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X