COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) versus STONEMAN MARBLE INDUSTRIES & ORS

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) versus STONEMAN MARBLE INDUSTRIES & ORS

No question of law arises under Section 130A when Revenue does not specifically challenge the Tribunal's factual finding that cases are similar, nor allege perverse findings; thus, High Court correctly declined reference.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Commissioner of Customs (Import); Respondent: Stoneman Marble Industries & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Decision
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Redemption Fine, Penalty Imposition, Reference to High Court, Fact Finding by Tribunal
Customs Law Redemption Fine Penalty Imposition Reference to High Court Fact Finding by Tribunal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Customs (Import)

Appellant

Stoneman Marble Industries & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Tribunal's reduction of redemption fine and penalty constituted a question of law for reference under Section 130A of Customs Act, 1962
  2. 2 Whether a standard formula for fines and penalties could be laid down based on past Tribunal decisions

Ratio Decidendi

No question of law arises under Section 130A when Revenue does not specifically challenge the Tribunal's factual finding that cases are similar, nor allege perverse findings; thus, High Court correctly declined reference.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Impugned orders of High Court affirmed
  • Parties to bear their own costs