Revenue's appeal dismissed for lack of penalty reduction by Tribunal, deemed misconceived with no legal question.

The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal as there was no actual reduction in penalty by the Tribunal. Despite the revenue's contention, the Tribunal had increased the penalty based on the respondent's concession. The Court found the appeal misconceived and lacking any substantial question of law, leading to its dismissal.

---

---

Issues involved: Reduction of penalty by Tribunal despite admission of clandestine removal, interpretation of penalty u/s 11AC of the Act.

The appellant revenue questioned the Tribunal's decision to reduce the penalty despite admission of clandestine removal by the respondents. The Tribunal, following a Delhi High Court judgment, increased the penalty to 25% of the confirmed duty amount. The revenue's appeal was allowed based on this increase.

The High Court noted that the revenue's appeal was based on the reduction of penalty by the Tribunal, but in reality, the Tribunal had increased the penalty based on the respondent's concession. Therefore, the proposed question by the revenue was not applicable to the Tribunal's order as the penalty was actually raised, not reduced.

The Court found that the revenue's appeal was misconceived as there was no actual reduction in penalty by the Tribunal. Since there was no substantial question of law involved, the appeal was dismissed.

---