TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken into consideration while fixing the amount of penalty. Since there is an absence of considerations of all the parameters the question of law as reframed will have to be answered in favour of the Appellant. The impugned order to the extent it reduces the penalty from Rupees Ten Crores to Rupees One Lakh is quashed and set aside - appeal allowed. - CUSTOM APPEAL NO. 35 OF 2019 WITH CUSTO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing of the Appeals was fixed on 3 February 2020. Accordingly, the Appeals are taken up for hearing today. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. After hearing learned counsel for the parties we have reframed the question of law as under :- Whether impugned order passed by the Tribunal is required to be set aside and the proceedings be relegated for reconsideration of the Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Respondents were liable for penalty under Section 112A of the Customs Act. The Tribunal however reduced the penalty from ₹ 10,00,00,000/- to ₹ 1,00,000/- observing thus :- However, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case including that appeals against the main company and one of the Directors have been abated, in our view, the ends of justice will be met, if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal was under obligation to give detailed reasoning thereof. That the Appeals against the Company and Directors have abated was one of the factors for the use of discretion, but in absence of statutory provisions mandating reduction in penalty on this ground, other factors for the use of discretion also had to be considered. From the perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner it does ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
