TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (4) TMI 490
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal filed by the department is for imposition of penalty on the respondents. The respondents had imported two second-hand machines and filed a Bill of Entry for clearance thereof on 12-5-1999. The machines were assessed to duty on the basis of documents produced by them. As per the documents, the goods were shipped prior to 1-4-99, the date from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed investigations. A statement was recorded from the Director of the respondent company, who acknowledged that the goods had actually been shipped on 10-4-1999. He, however, pleaded innocence as regards the date of shipment shown in the Bill of Lading. In the face of the department's proposal to confiscate the machines and to impose penalty on the importer, the respondents waived show cause notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner ought to have imposed appropriate penalty either under Section 112(a) or under Section 114A of the Act. Learned SDR has reiterated this plea. Learned Consultant for the respondents has relied on certain findings of this Bench recorded in Final Order No. 151/2005 = 2005 (185) E.L.T. 75 (Tribunal) ibid. In that final order, we had recorded a submission of learned DR, which reads thus :- "Lea....