TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeded against the appellant for confirmation of the 100% penalty in respect of the short paid amount of duty - Since, there is no ambiguity in interpretation of the provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 28 ibid, with regard to the quantum of penalty to be deposited, the benefit of reducing amount of penalty of 15% should be available to the appellant. The impugned order, to the extent it has upheld the adjudged demand of penalty confirmed in the adjudication order is set aside and the appeal to such extent is allowed in favour of the appellant, holding that the appellant should liable to pay penalty of 15% of the adjudged amount of duty confirmed/paid by it before initiation of the show cause proceedings - Appeal allowed in part. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the said adjudication order, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 30.08.2018 has upheld the adjudged demands confirmed on the appellant. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the entire adjudged amounts of duty and interest were paid by the appellant before the issuance of the show cause notice and thus, as per the provisions of sub-section (4) (6) of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, no proceedings were required to be initiated by the department for recovery of the penalty amount confirmed in the orders passed by the lower authorities. He further submits that since the Bills of Entr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notice for recovery of the 15% amount of penalty, the department had proceeded against the appellant for confirmation of the 100% penalty in respect of the short paid amount of duty. Since, there is no ambiguity in interpretation of the provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 28 ibid, with regard to the quantum of penalty to be deposited, I am of the view that the benefit of reducing amount of penalty of 15% should be available to the appellant. 7. In view of above, the impugned order, to the extent it has upheld the adjudged demand of penalty confirmed in the adjudication order is set aside and the appeal to such extent is allowed in favour of the appellant, holding that the appellant should liable to pay penalty of 15% of the adjudg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
