A.K.SIKRI,J.ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN,J. - (1.) Having regard to the fact that only the meager amount is involved, we are not entertaining this appeal. Which is accordingly dismissed.
(2.) The appellant herein had declared lesser price for the goods which were cleared for home consumption. When it was detected and pointed out, differential amount was claimed which was paid by the appellant. On that basis penalty proceedings were also initiated against the appellant and the penalty was imposed which has been upheld by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short 'the CESTAT') in the impugned judgment. We find from the orders of the assessing authority as well as the CESTAT, that a clear finding of the fact is arrived at to the effect that there was a deliberate under -valuation which is discerned from the Resolution dated 2nd August, 1996 passed by the appellant itself. We,therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. ...................J (A.K. SIKRI) .....................J (ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN) NEW DELHI April 04, 2016;