Deliberate under-valuation penalty sustained where concurrent findings confirmed intentional misstatement and no basis existed to interfere.

Deliberate under-valuation of goods cleared for home consumption was upheld on the basis of the appellant's own resolution and the concurrent factual findings of the assessing authority and Tribunal. The record supported the conclusion that the goods had been intentionally under-valued, and the differential amount had already been paid after detection. As no ground was shown to disturb those findings, the penalty was sustained and the appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty for deliberate under-valuation of goods cleared for home consumption was liable to be interfered with.

Analysis: The material on record, including the appellant's own resolution, supported the finding that the goods were deliberately under-valued. The assessing authority and the Tribunal had recorded a clear factual conclusion on this aspect, and the differential amount had already been paid after detection. No basis was shown to disturb those concurrent findings.

Conclusion: The penalty was sustained and no interference was called for; the appeal was dismissed.

---