Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1187 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (10) TMI 1187 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - 2016 (334) E.L.T. 120 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - 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 manufa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essive. - Penalty reduced - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.E/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 o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal against the earlier Adjudication order. Revenue filed appeal on the ground 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 part .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Revenue submits that the Adjudicating authority had given detailed finding of the 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) E .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version