TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within six months from the date of such order passed under Section 129B(1) of the Act, decides to rectify any mistake apparent from the record, it shall make amendment to any order passed under Section 129B(1) of the Act and shall make such amendments if the mistake is brought to its notice by the Commissioner of Customs or the other party to the appeal. In such event, the proviso to Section 129B(2) of the Act mandates issuance of notice. In the case on hand, it is not rectification of mistake by the Tribunal. Therefore, proviso to Section 129-B of the Act does not apply to the facts of the present case. - Decided in favor of Revenue. - C.M.A.No.1908 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 4-12-2014 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. For the Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r bars. Based on the said statements Abdul Kadar was apprehended. In his statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, Abdul Kadar implicated the appellant herein. 2.2. It is the case of the appellant that no statement was recorded from him and no summons were served on him. However, by the order of adjudication dated 10.12.1993, the Collector of Customs had directed seizure of all the silver bricks and also imposed a penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on the appellant. 2.3. Challenging the said order, the department filed 21 appeals before the Tribunal against various persons, including the appellant herein, who were involved in the said transaction. The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the Department and enhanced the penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the respondent, he has not chosen to appear before the Tribunal. Therefore, it would not lie in the mouth of the appellant to state that no notice was issued by the Tribunal before an order of enhancement is passed. 5.4. Accordingly, the first question of law raised is answered against the appellant and in favour of the department. 6.1. On the second question of law raised in this appeal, the main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal is not empowered to enhance the penalty under Section 129B(2) of the Act without issuing a notice in this regard. 6.2. For better appreciation of this issue, it would be relevant to reproduce Section 129B(2) of the Act, which reads as under: Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
