9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UDICIAL) Shri A. K. Singh, AC (AR) for the Appellant None for the Respondent ORDER PER P.K.CHOUDHARY : The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Appellant for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 2. In view of the reasons as explained in the Miscellaneous Application, the delay of 97 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The Miscellaneous Applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1962. He also imposed redemption fine under Section 125 of the Act @ 30% and personal penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act, 11% (Approx.). 5. The order passed by the original adjudicating authority was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the importer. The First Appellate Authority, by passing the impugned order, upheld the order of confiscation and enhancement of value. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f value has been ordered by the First Appellate Authority on the basis of concurrence given by the importer for such enhancement. There is no challenge to the order of confiscation, but Revenue is challenging the quantum of redemption fine and penalty, which stand reduced by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 8. On perusal of the impugned order, I note that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has ordered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
