Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Yunusbhai Shamsuddin Devdiwala and Shri Sabirbhai Shamsuddin Devdiwala. Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ahmedabad-I

2015 (10) TMI 1187 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Duty demand - Imposition of penalty - Suppression of facts - Held that:- Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating authority to reconsider the imposition of penalty on the partner. In the impugned order, the Commissioner observed that the Appellants had filed wrong declarations with wilful suppression of actual manufacturing process carried out by them and suppressing the nature and quality of the fabric manufactured by them and mis-declaring their actual classification with intent to eva .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/700,701/2012 - Order No.A/ 10703-10704/2015 - Dated:- 28-5-2015 - MR. P.K. DAS, J. For The Appellant: Shri Kuntal Parikh, Advocate For The Respondent: Shri L. Tendupatra, Authorised Representative Per: P.K. Das These appeals are arising out of a common order and therefore, both are taken up together for disposal. The Appellants are partners of M/s Vijay Textiles, filed, these appeals against imposition of penalties of ₹ 5 lakhs each under Rule 209A of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ound that the penalty should be imposed on the partner. By Final Order No.A/1921-1925/WZB/AHD/ 2010, dt.16.12.2010, the Tribunal disposed of both the appeals to the extent, demand of duty along with interest was upheld and reduced the penalty to ₹ 5 lakhs on the partnership firm. Regarding imposition of penalty on the partner, the Tribunal remanded the matter for considering imposition of the penalty on the partners. 4. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellants submits tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he role of the partner for wrong availment of SSI exemption by using the brand name of other person. He relied upon various decisions as under:- i) CCE Daman Vs Mohd. Amin A.S. Lakha 2012 (275) ELT 465 (Tri-Ahmd) ii) Apurva Aluminum Corporation Vs CCE Vadodara 2010 (261) ELT 515 (Tri-Ahmd) iii) Apurva Aluminum Corporation Vs CESTAT 2014 (302) ELT 495 (Guj.) iv) Prakash Metal Works Vs Collr.C.E., Ahmedabad 2007 (216) ELT 660 (S.C.) 6. I find that in this particular case, the Tribunal remanded the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version