Full Judgment
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.