9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran These two appeals are directed against order-in-appeal No. 44-2010 dated 15/07/2010 and Order-in-Appeal No. 27/2010 dated 12/04/2010 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, we find that the issue that falls for consideration of the Bench is regarding reduction of redemption fine and penalty imposed by the lower autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be 10% of the assessable value and penalty should be 5% of the assessable value: 1. Rex Printing Press Vs CCE Calcutta [2005 (184) ELT 73] 2. Monisha Industries Pvt Ltd [2007 (79) RLT 496] 3. HT & Co., [2006 (74) RLT 599] 4. Big Apple Mfg FO. No 837-841/2006 dt 26.04.2006 5. Big Apple Mfg Co. FO No. 231-232/2005 dt 14.2.2005 6. H.T. Company FO No. 125-128/2009 dt 19.2.2009 Learned A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of entries in these appeals to the tune of 10% of the assessable value.
6. Since we have held that goods are liable for confiscation, penalty also needs to be imposed on them and the penalty amount will be 5% of the assessable value in these two appeals. The appeals are disposed of as indicated hereinabove.
(Order pronounced and dictated in open court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
