TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed? - Held that: - It is only in the appeal filed by the department that the amount of penalty could be increased and for that the appeal filed by the assessee had to be dismissed. But in the case in hand, the facts are otherwise. The appeal filed by the revenue was specifically dismissed. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the order passed by the first appellate authority was set aside and the quantum of redemption fine and penalty was increased. That course was not possible in the appeal filed by the assessee, especially when the appeal filed by the department had been dismissed - order passed by the Tribunal set aside - order passed by the first appellate authority restored - amount of penalty and redemption fine as imposed by f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grieved against the said order, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), who vide order dated 18.8.2008, reduced redemption fine to ₹ 2,00,000/- and penalty to ₹ 1,20,000/-. The appellant preferred further appeal before the Tribunal. The department also filed appeal bearing Custom Appeal No. C/719/2008-CUS (DB). The Tribunal, after hearing the parties, dismissed the appeal filed by the department. However, in the appeal filed by the appellant, the amount of redemption fine was increased from ₹ 2,00,000/- to ₹ 3,00,000/- and penalty from ₹ 1,20,000/- to ₹ 3,00,000/-, which was totally without jurisdiction, as in the appeal filed by the appellant, the amount of pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Tribunal. It is only in the appeal filed by the department that the amount of penalty could be increased and for that the appeal filed by the assessee had to be dismissed. But in the case in hand, the facts are otherwise. The appeal filed by the revenue was specifically dismissed. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the order passed by the first appellate authority was set aside and the quantum of redemption fine and penalty was increased. That course was not possible in the appeal filed by the assessee, especially when the appeal filed by the department had been dismissed. 7. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeal is allowed. The substantial question of law, as framed in para No. 5 above, is answered in favour of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
