TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 773X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is given for reducing the penalty from ₹ 20 lakhs to ₹ 1 lakh except observing that it "appears to be excessive". We have already taken note of the circumstances under which the breach has been committed by the respondent. More serious breach is the violation of undertaking given to this Court. - was not a fit case where penalty should have been reduced. Since the respondent is now to pay the duty at the depreciated value of the machinery, we set aside the order of the CEGAT in so far as reduction of penalty from ₹ 20 lakhs to ₹ 1 lakh is concerned - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Civil Appeal Nos. 8312 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 23-3-2015 - A. K. Sikri And Rohinton Pali Nariman,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr A K Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i. This is treated as the breach of the aforesaid Notification No.64/1988. It would also be relevant to state here that at the time of import, whether the respondent would be entitled to exemption under the aforesaid Notification or not was the dispute which had arisen. The matter had come up to this Court. Before this Court the respondent had given an affidavit of undertaking in which apart from agreeing to fulfill the aforesaid conditions, it was also agreed that the equipment shall not be disposed of by the respondent without 30 days clear notice in writing to the Collector of Customs, Kolkatta. It is found by the CEGAT that there is a violation of the aforesaid undertaking as well as in as much as no such clear 30 days notice in writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the penalty from ₹ 20 lakhs to ₹ 1 lakh except observing that it appears to be excessive . We have already taken note of the circumstances under which the breach has been committed by the respondent . More serious breach is the violation of undertaking given to this Court. In these circumstances, we are of the view that it was not a fit case where penalty should have been reduced. Since the respondent is now to pay the duty at the depreciated value of the machinery, we set aside the order of the CEGAT in so far as reduction of penalty from ₹ 20 lakhs to ₹ 1 lakh is concerned and substitute the same by the following directions: the penalty payable shall be same as the duty which is now to be paid by the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
