Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order passed by CESTAT, Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata in Custom Appeal No. CSM 117/2005, dated 8th June, 2006 whereby the redemption of fine has been reduced from Rs. 3.00 Lacs to Rs. 1.5 lacs and the penalty of Rs. 50000/ - has been maintained. Against this order, this Tax Appeal has been preferred. Having heard learned counsels for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that several items were seized by the respondents when the search was carried out at the premises of this appellant on 17th September, 2003 who is dealing with mobiles and other electronic items.
(2.) ORDER in Original was passed on 1st April, 2005 after recording the statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 and thereafter notice was issued and adequate opportunity of being heard was also given to this appellant. At length there is a discussion about the goods seized from the premises of this appellant in the Order in Original dated 1st April, 2005 and ultimately redemption fine was imposed of Rs. 3.00 Lacs and a penalty upon this appellant was imposed of Rs. 50000/ -. It appears that against this order, appeal was preferred by this appellant before the CESTAT in which without appreciating paragraphs 18.2, 18.3, 18.4 of the order by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, CESTAT, who has appreciated the market value of the items as Rs. 5.00 lacs, the redemption fine has been reduced from Rs. 3.00 lacs to Rs. 1.5 lacs while maintaining the penalty of Rs. 50000/ -.
(3.) IT appears that for certain goods, there is an explanation, whereas, for rest of the goods, there is no explanation with this appellant. At length, the counsel for both sides have argued out about several mobile phones, hand -camera, etc.;