2009 (11) TMI 477

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al)]. - The Central Excise department has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 proposing to formulate the following substantial question of law : (a) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal is justified in setting aside the personal penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 presently Rule 26 o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ow cause notice was issued after a period of six months from the date of visit of the officers and the completion of the investigation, and hence the notice was held to be barred by limitation in light of the several decisions referred to and relied upon by the CESTAT. 3. Mr. Oza has further further submitted that the appeal filed by the Excise department against the company being Tax Appeal No. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ities, the respondent has categorically stated that he was doing it as per the instructions given to him by Mr. Tyagi. Even the penalty imposed on him was of Rs. 25,000/-. Considering all these aspects, we are of the view that this is not a fit case where the substantial question of law should be formulated by this Court. The case of the present respondent is clearly distinguishable than that of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X