Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2021 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 687 - HC - CustomsPenalty u/s 112 of CA - amount not exceeding the duty sought to be evaded on such goods - quantification of amount involved in the case - HELD THAT:- The Commissioner, depending upon the role each one of the individuals covered in paragraph 6 of the order has played/exercised his jurisdiction, discretion and imposed penalty. The penalty imposed on individuals dealt with in paragraph 6 of the order dated 13.04.2015 varies from ₹ 15 crore to ₹ 1 lakh. When it comes to subject Officers, the Commissioner refrained from imposing penalties. Therefore, this begs the very question, namely, whether the Commissioner has properly and correctly exercised the jurisdiction vested in him by Section 112 of the Act. First question that may come out for consideration before the Tribunal is not whether the penalty imposed on a particular individual is justified etc., but, the question is whether the non-imposition of penalty on respondent is tenable and in accordance with law. In the particular circumstances of the case, the question for decision before the Tribunal is: Whether refraining from imposition of penalty is valid and legal? The question is de hors fiscal limits and pure question of law. The order under appeal is set aside. Matter remitted to CESTAT for consideration and disposal in accordance with law, along with the appeal pending in the matter of Anil Kumar - answered in favour of the appellant and against the respondent.
|