2015 (2) TMI 920

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed Representative JUDGMENT Per :  Mr. P.K. Das; Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby a penalty of Rs. 20 Lakh imposed on Shri Jayesh P. Bhimani authorized signatory of M/s. Parshwa Chemicals and M/s. Bhimani Chemicals , Respondent herein, was set-aside. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that M/s. Ganesh Chem Tec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Ganesh Chem Tech Pvt. Limited and its Director Shri Naresh F. Shah.  But, the penalty imposed on the Respondent was set-aside. Hence the Revenue filed this appeal against the setting aside of penalty. 3. Learned AR for the Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal and submits that Commissioner (Appeals) has remanded the matter in a piece meal, which is not correct.  He submits that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red to consider the case of the respondent.  In view of that, we modify the impugned order to the extent that the adjudicating authority shall also consider the case of the respondent in de-novo proceedings. It is directed that the adjudicating authority during the de-novo adjudication would take into consideration the observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the submissions made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X