Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Steel Mongers (I) Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh

2016 (1) TMI 965 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Whether penalty is sustainable upon a dealer when demand of duty stands dropped? - Whether penalty can be imposed for abetment when main party is held not guilty? - Held that:- In view of the fact that the order demanding duty and penalty in the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Sukhdev Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of two appeals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short the Act ) against the order dated 6.8.2014 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in Excise Appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

100% penalty upon a dealer is justified in view of decision of this Hon'ble Court? 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as narrated in the appeal are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading of iron and steel products. It issu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8 to the appellant to show case as to why penalty under Sections 25 and 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (for brevity the Rules ) be not imposed. The appellant filed reply to the said show cause notice pleading that the penalty could not be issue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s well as the appellant, M/s Swastik Steel Corporation and M/s Khemka Ispat Ltd. Feeling aggrieved, they filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). M/s JCBL Ltd. challenged the demand as well as penalty whereas the appellant challenged the le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nal. M/s JCBL Ltd. also filed an appeal against the order, Annexure A-3. The Tribunal vide order dated 25.4.2014 (Annexure A-5) allowed the appeals filed by M/s JCBL Ltd. and M/s Swastik Steel Corporation. On coming to know about the said order, Anne .....

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 learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the duty demand and penalty in the case of main assessee has already been dropped and, therefore, in view of the judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chand .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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