2016 (11) TMI 1140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed Representative ORDER Per Mr. P.M. Saleem These appeals are filed by M/s. Rupen Marketing Pvt. Limited against a common Order-in-Appeal dated 03.06.2015 and hence all the appeals are taken up together for disposal. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the said Order-in-Appeal has upheld the impugned orders passed by the lower authorities. The issue involved is whether confiscation of the imported .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 757 22230Kg 1983Kg 10000/- 2. The appellants contended that the excess weight is due to packing material of corrugated boxes. Ld. Advocate for the appellants argued that in reality there is no excess cargo and therefore no mis-declaration and hence confiscation along with redemption fine and penalty on them is not warranted. On the other hand, ld Authorised Representative for Revenue vehementl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... list mentions the carton weight and net weight. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders of the lower authorities. However, we find that there is no allegation of malafide on the part of the appellants. We find that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, imposition of penalty is too harsh a measure. We, therefore set-aside the penalties imposed on the appellants. 4. The i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X