2015 (6) TMI 773

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Niharika Ahluwalia, Adv., Ms Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. and Mr B Krishna Prasad, Adv. For the Respondent : Ms Sadapurna Mukherjee, Adv., Mr Kunal Chatterji, Adv. and Mr Kabir Shankar Gose, Adv. ORDER The respondent herein had imported one Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Scanner, which is a medical instrument, for the purpose of using it in the hospital. The respondent cleared the said instrument wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... beds reserved for such patients. It is an admitted fact that after use of this equipment for few years the respondent had sold the same to another establishment known as M/s. Florence Medical-cum-Diagnostic Centre (P) Ltd. Siliguri. This is treated as the breach of the aforesaid Notification No.64/1988. It would also be relevant to state here that at the time of import, whether the respondent ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the CEGAT. In the Order-in- Original passed, redemption fine was also imposed and penalty in the sum of Rs. 20 lakhs was inflicted as well. The Tribunal, however, after giving the aforesaid findings has come to the conclusion that the duty should be paid at the reduced value, i.e. depreciated value since for few years the obligation was met by the respondent . Insofar as redemption fine is conc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the CEGAT that no reason whatsoever is given for reducing the penalty from Rs. 20 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh except observing that it "appears to be excessive". We have already taken note of the circumstances under which the breach has been committed by the respondent . More serious breach is the violation of undertaking given to this Court. In these circumstances, we are of the view that it was no....