TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the records and on hearing both sides, I find that this case requires to be finally disposed of at this stage. Therefore, I allow the present application unconditionally and proceed to dispose of the appeal on its merits. 2. The appellant was one of the Directors of M/s Delta Insecticides Ltd. at the material time. The jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed a deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relation to duty and penalty stood settled under the Scheme on payment by the company of an amount of Rs. 1,43,566/-. The factum of this settlement in respect of the company was recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) in her Order dated 21-8-2000. The Commissioner (Appeals) considered the question relating to penalty imposed on the present appellant and found that the penalty had been correctly imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Quality Fabricators Erectors [1999 (33) RLT 122 (CEGAT)] and also Board s Circular F. No. 275/33/98-CX.8 A (Pt.) dated 9-12-1998 as also Trade Notices based on the said circular. Ld. Counsel, therefore, prays for setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. 5. Ld. JDR Shri S.C. Pushkarna submits that there is nothing in the memorandum of the appeal to show that the appellant had raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s) in her order. The Board's Circular cited by ld. Counsel for the appellant was very well in force at the time when ld. Commissioner (Appeals) was considering the appellants' liability to penalty. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the invokable rule that Board's circulars are binding on the department and all departmental authorities are liable to follow the same and, further, that even a T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at case held that, in view of the appeal of the main manufacturer having been settled under the KVS Scheme, it would not be desirable to hold their co-noticee to be guilty of contravening the provisions of Central Excise law. The Tribunal, therefore, set aside the penalty imposed on the co-noticee. The lower appellate authority ought to have set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant, by follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
