2018 (10) TMI 841 - AT - Customs

Tribunal corrects penalty amount for appellant, aligns with others involved in the case

The Tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application for rectification of a mistake in the order dated 30.5.2018, specifically related to the penalty ... Rectification of Mistake - Held that:- This Tribunal has mentioned the names of all the appellants including the present appellant Shri Anand Kulkarni and allowed the appeals partly in relation to all the appellants by reduction in penalty imposed and confirmed against each of the appellants. However, in para 10.10, the name of the appellant could not be mentioned and the penalty imposed on him also not mentioned - at page 18 of the order in the 9th line of paragraph 10.10, instead of the expression “therefore reduced to Rs. One lakh each”, it should be read as “therefore reduced to Rs. One lakh each and penalty on Shri Anand Kulkarni is reduced to Rs. Two lakhs.” - ROM application allowed. Issues:Rectification of mistake apparent on the face of the order dated 30.5.2018 regarding penalty imposed on the appellants.Analysis:The miscellaneous application sought rectification of a mistake in the order dated 30.5.2018, specifically related to the penalty imposed on the appellants. The learned Advocate for the applicant highlighted that the name of the present appellant was not mentioned in para 10.10 of the order, where penalties against other appellants were confirmed and reduced. He argued that the penalty against the present appellant should be considered as &8377; 1,00,000/- or at most &8377; 2,00,000/- imposed on the companies. It was contended that since all listed appeals were partially allowed, including the appeal of the present applicant, the typographical error needed rectification.The learned AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, argued that the penalty against the present appellant should be &8377; 2,00,000/-, considering the proportionality with penalties imposed on other appellants by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal acknowledged that while the names of all the appellants were mentioned on the first page of the order, the name of the present appellant was omitted in para 10.10, where penalties were discussed. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's contention on the penalty quantum against the present appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the correction in the order, specifying that the penalty on the present appellant, Shri Anand Kulkarni, should be reduced to &8377; 2,00,000/- instead of the previously mentioned amount.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application for rectification of the mistake apparent on the face of the order, specifying the correction in the penalty amount imposed on the present appellant. The judgment clarified the rectification needed in the order to accurately reflect the penalty reduction for the appellant, aligning it with the penalties imposed on other appellants and companies involved in the case.