C/88288/2014 — CC (IMPORT) MUMBAI vs SHREENATH ENTERPRISES

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI

WEST ZONAL BENCH

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO: 88288 OF 2014

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No: MUM-CUSTM-IMP-1706-13-14 dated 6th May 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-I.]

Commissioner of Customs (Import) New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 … Appellant versus

Shreenath Enterprises 9/11, Bhaskar Lane, 2nd Floor, Room No. 27, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002 …Respondent

WITH

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO: 88289 OF 2014

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No: MUM-CUSTM-IMP-1706-13-14 dated 6th May 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-I.]

Commissioner of Customs (Import) New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 … Appellant versus

Somil M Parekh 9/11, Bhaskar Lane, 2nd Floor, Room No. 27, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002 …Respondent

AND

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO: 88290 OF 2014

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No: MUM-CUSTM-IMP-1706-13-14 dated 6th May 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-I.]

Commissioner of Customs (Import) New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 … Appellant

2 C/88288-88290/2014 versus

Jitendra J Doshi 132, Narayan Dhuri Street, Masjid (W), Mumbai-400003 …Respondent

APPEARANCE: Shri DS Maan, Deputy Commissioner (AR) for the appellant Shri R K Tomar and Shri Gaurav Sarfare, Advocates for the respondents

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MR AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

FINAL ORDER NO: 86834-86836/2024

DATE OF HEARING:

06/11/2024 DATE OF DECISION:
06/11/2024

PER: CORAM
The appeals of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai lie against order1 of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai setting aside the penalties of 2,00,000 on M/s Shreenath Enterprises and 1,00,000 each on the other two on the respondents. 2. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the amounts in dispute are below the threshold prescribed in the New

1 [order-in-appeal no. MUM-CUSTM-IMP-1706-13-14 dated 6th May 2014]

3 C/88288-88290/2014 Litigation Policy2 and, therefore, the appeals may be disposed off. 3. We have heard Learned Authorised Representative. 4. Considering the amount involved in this dispute and the prescriptions in the New Litigation Policy supra, these appeals are dismissed without going into merits of the impugned order.
(Dictated and Pronounced in Open Court)

(AJAY SHARMA)
Member (Judicial) (C J MATHEW) Member (Technical)

*/as

2 [F. No. 390/Misc/30/ 2023-JC dated 2nd November 2023]