Clandestine removal penalties sustain against partners, with no further penalty warranted on the facts.

Clandestine removal of excisable pharmaceutical goods without payment of duty led to confirmation of the duty demand and penalties under the penal provisions. The Tribunal noted that partners of a partnership firm are jointly liable, and the penalties imposed on the partners were sustainable on that basis. It further held that no additional penalty was called for in the circumstances. The Revenue's request for further interference with the Commissioner's order was rejected, and the Commissioner's order was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue was entitled to interference with the Commissioner's order on penalty for clandestine removal of excisable goods.

Analysis: The demand had arisen from alleged clandestine removal of pharmaceutical goods without payment of duty. The Commissioner had upheld the duty demand and imposed penalties under the relevant penal provisions. The Tribunal noted that the partners of a partnership firm are jointly liable and that the penalties imposed on the partners were sustainable. It further held that, in the circumstances, no additional penalty was called for under the applicable penal provisions.

Conclusion: The Revenue's plea for further penalty was rejected and the order of the Commissioner was not interfered with.

---