DINESH B. SOMANI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MENTIONED not on board. In the light of the urgency made out, the appeal is taken up for admission. The appeal is directed against the order of pre -deposit. The contention before us is that the applicant is a Karta of M/s. Jai Aravali Industries which is a HUF (Hindu Undivided Family) while the Tribunal directs the HUF to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/ - towards penalty, it also directs the petitioner -applicant/appellant separately to pay Rs. 1,00,000/ -. Therefore, apart from the fact that both cannot be penalized and secondly this is not a case where the applicant/appellant before us was responsible for the under -valuation that this is a fit case where the discretion should not have been exercised so arbitrarily by the Tribunal.

(2.) MR . Jetly appearing on behalf of the revenue would support the order of the Tribunal and submit that it is made at the stage of pre -deposit, and therefore, appeal raises no substantial questions of law and deserves to be dismissed.

(3.) HAVING perused the order and the light of these submissions, we are of the opinion that appeal deserves admission. It is admitted on the following substantial questions of law: -