2019 (6) TMI 1609

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L) Shri A. K. Singh, AC (AR) for the Appellant None for the Respondent ORDER The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Appellant for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 2. In view of the reasons as explained in the Miscellaneous Application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The Miscellaneous Application (COD) is allowed. 3. W....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....redemption fine under Section 125 of the Act @ 25- 26% and personal penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act, varying from 10% to 11%. 5. The order passed by the original adjudicating authority was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the importer. The First Appellate Authority, by passing the impugned order, upheld the order of confiscation and enhancement of value. However, he reduc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lue has been ordered by the First Appellate Authority on the basis of concurrence given by the importer for such enhancement. There is no challenge to the order of confiscation, but Revenue is challenging the quantum of redemption fine and penalty, which stand reduced by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 8. On perusal of the impugned order, I note that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has ordered r....