PNB fraud due to failure of internal control, says RBI.:      Celeb jeweller Nirav Modi named in PNB’s $1.77-b fraud. Bank suspends 10 officers, lodges complaint with CBI; more banks may be hit. :      Bombay High Court in a hearing on 6th Feb, 2018 says GST regime is not user friendly. :      GST Network Chairman Ajay Bhushan return simplification panel to meet industry this week to simplify the return filing process.:    Finance Secretary Hasmukh Adhia said the Government stares at a Rs 50,000 crore GST revenue shortfall in the current fiscal. :    E-Way Bill which was to be rolled-out on 1st Feb is deferred to month-end due to technical glitches.:      TN raked in 22% more GST at Rs 23,318 crore between Jul-Dec 2017, against Rs 19,018 crore under VAT in the corresponding period the previous year. :      MoS,Corp Affairs PP Chaudhary says in Rajya Sabha that Govt has detected GST evasion of Rs 5.70 Crores in 16 cases during Jul-Nov 2017 - 6th Feb 2018. :      FM, Arun Jaitley says that States are not in favour of bringing the petroleum products under GST. :      The Finance Secretary, Hasmukh Adhia says out of 7 lakh tax payers who opted for composition scheme 5 lakhs had a turnover less than Rs 5 lakhs pa, though the exemption limit is upto Rs 20 lakhs. :     

CESTAT Ahmedabad : Shri Jawandamal Dhannamal Vs. Commissioner of CUSTOMS (Appeals) -JAMNAGAR : 10th March, 2017


CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
O-20, New Mental Hospital Compound, Meghani Nagar,
West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad 380 014

Appeal No.  : C/356/2010
Arising out of OIA-88/COMMR-A-/JMN/2010 dt 09/06/2010 passed by the Commissioner of CUSTOMS (Appeals) -JAMNAGAR

Shri Jawandamal Dhannamal
Appellant(s)

Vs.

Commissioner of CUSTOMS (Appeals) -JAMNAGAR
Respondent(s)

Represented by
For Applicant(s) : None
For Respondent(s) : Shri L Patra, Authorised Representative

CORAM :
Dr D.M. Misra, Hon'ble Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing / Decision : 10/03/2017


ORDER NO. A/10607 / 2017

Per : Dr D.M. Misra,

None present for the appellant. Heard the Ld AR for the Revenue.


2. I find that in the proceeding before the Ld Commissioner (Appeals) the appellant challenged the penalty and redemption fine. Considering the evidences and various circumstances of the case, the Ld Commissioner has reduced the redemption fine to Rs 60,000/- and penalty to Rs 50,000/-. The Ld Commissioner (Appeals) at Para 5.8 observed as follows:

Now, dealing with the quantum of fine and penalty imposed on the appellant importer in the impugned order, I have already found in the foregoing paras that the order of the adjudicating authority for confiscation of 85.170 kgs of scrap v/s Rs 13,16,728/- under Section 119 of the Act does not survive in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Consequently, the plea of the appellant for lowering the quantum of redemption fine and penalty imposed in the impugned order crave for some consideration. Having regard to the totality of the attendant facts and he gravity of offence committed by the appellant and also keeping in view that confiscation of HMS v/a Rs 13,16,728/- ordered by the adjudicating authority was found to be not sustainable, I am of the considered view that the ends of justice will be met if the redemption fine and penalty is reduced and re-fixed at Rs 60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) and Rs 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) respectively and I order so.


3. I do not find any reason to interfere with the said finding of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) who after considering the circumstances has substantially reduced the redemption and penalty and no additional circumstances brought on record warranting further reduction. In the result, the appeal being devoid of merit, accordingly dismissed.


(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)


(D.M. Misra)
Member (Judicial)


swami
2

Last modified on Sunday, 19 March 2017 10:46

Additional Info

  • Date Range: Friday, 10 March 2017
  • Court/Authority: CESTAT
  • Tax Type: Customs duty
  • Petitioner/Appellant: Shri Jawandamal Dhannamal Vs. Commissioner of CUSTOMS (Appeals) -JAMNAGAR
  • Respondent: Shri Jawandamal Dhannamal Vs. Commissioner of CUSTOMS (Appeals) -JAMNAGAR
  • Appl no. or Appl year: Appeal No. : C/356/2010
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • CESTAT Location: Ahmedabad
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 

correctly?

If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes

 

  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues


 

Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Go to top