2016 (4) TMI 730

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri A.K. Bhattacharya, Consultant ORDER PER SRI H.K. THAKUR This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No.35/DIB/CE(A)/GHY/13 dated-14/08/2013 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Guwahati by dismissing Revenue's appeal filed before him. 2. Shri S. Mukhopadhyay, Supdt. (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that during the Audit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e does not have any case for enhancement of penalty. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved is whether penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed by the Adjudicating authority and upheld by first appellate authority under Order-in-Appeal dated 14/08/2013, is justified or the same is required to be enhanced as per the appeal filed before this bench. 4.1 First appellate auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....housand rupees whichever is greater. But the adjudicating authority while deciding the case imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000.00 under Rule 15 (1) of CCR, 2004 without justifying the ground of imposing less amount of penalty and the appellant has filed the appeal on the ground that whether the impugned order is proper and legal in imposing the reduced amount of penalty of Rs. 10,000.00 under rule 15 (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....therefore, the contention of the appellant is not tenable and is liable to be set aside." 4.2 It is also observed from the show cause notice dated 14/7/2009 that no special reasons have been given for proposing higher penalty upon BSNL. Even the grounds of appeal filed before this bench also do not disclose as to why higher penalty is required to be imposed and to what extent. On the contrary, ....