2015 (8) TMI 1171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Appellant : Mr. K Mohanamurali For the Respondents : Mr. T V Suresh Kumar - R1 JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed against the order of the Tribunal dated 12.09.2008 made in Final Order No.995 of 2008 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai was admitted by this Court on the following substantial qu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s [2009 (238) ELT 3], Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. S.K.F. India Ltd. [2009 (239) ELT 385] and Union of India v. Dharmendra Textiles Processors [(2008) 306 ITR 277] . It is not a case on hand. It is a case of penalty imposed under Section 114 of the Customs Act. Hence, the question of law is re-framed as follows: "Whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the penalty i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....first respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the first respondent herein had filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the order of the Adjudicating Authority. Aggrieved thereby, the first respondent pursued the matter before the Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the contention of the first respondent and allowed the appeal holding as follows: "Heard both sides. 2. The fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stoms House Agents' Regulations. Without expressing views on the role of other parties to the order, I hold that there is no evidence for imposing penalty on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act." 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the Department is before this Court. 5. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for....