TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the appellant Sh Govind Dixit & Sh. A. K. Singh, ARs for the respondent ORDER The present appeals have been filed against the order-in-original No. 48-49/KJ/PR.COMMR/2015 dated 01.12.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi where the penalties were imposed under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Brief facts of the case are that all the appellants were in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irst three appellants; and Rs. 15,00,000/- on the fourth appellant. Being aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed by them. 3. With this background, we heard Sh. Ashish Bansal, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Sh. Govind Dixit, ld AR for the Revenue. We also perused the material available on record. Appellants submit that they belong to the poor/ lower category of the society. They were m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The said owners who handed over the smuggled gold were not traceable inspite of the best efforts of the department. 6. In the present appeal, the main issue is regarding the question of levy of penalty. As stated above, since offence of smuggling has taken place, so, the penalty is justified but looking at the young age of the appellants and considering the fact that this is their first offence,....