ORDER
Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) reducing the penalty imposed on the assessee of Rs. 1,29,768/- to Rs. 97,326/-and reducing the fine for redemption on goods ordered to be confiscated from the assessee from Rs. 1,30,000/- to Rs. 65,000/-.
2. The ground in the appeal, that the Commissioner has not furnished
any reason for reducing the fine for redemption and penalty. In the light of the
Commissioner (Appeals)’s finding that he has reduced them having regard to the
gravity of the offence. It is a well settled principle of law that fine for redemption
of confiscated goods and penalty should be commensurate with the gravity of
the offence. The Commissioner therefore has discretion for reducing the fine and
penalty. The question is whether he has exercised his discretion properly. The
value of the goods was ordered to be confiscated around Rs. 6.50 lakhs, the duty
involved on them is around Rs. 1.30 lakh. The redemption fine and penalty ad
judged by the Asstt. Commissioner are considerably lower than the maximum
provided in law. In that situation, the Commissioner (Appeals) was required to
indicate in his order the circumstances which have implied him to reduce the
fine and penalty. No such indication of any kind is forthcoming. On the contrary,
he has noted the admission of the assessee that the goods were manufactured
and cleared from its factory without payment of duty. He has noted the contravention of law by the assessee. Therefore, since existence of any factor justifying
reduction in fine than decided by the Asstt. Commissioner, he could not have
reduced them.
3. I, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) reducing the fine and penalty and restore the order of the Asstt. Commissioner.