GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 431 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

2016 (8) TMI 431 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - 2016 (341) E.L.T. 578 (Kar.) - Cancellation of licence - Forfeiture of security deposit penalty proportionately of punishment - Held that: - when the discretion has been exercised, and considering the facts and circumstances, such discretion exercised cannot be said to be per verse, which would be a case for interference in exercise of power with this Court. It is required to be stated that when two views are possible and if one is opted by the lower .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

This appeal is directed against the order dated 03-07-2014 passed by the Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal has modified the order passed by the Original Authority and has confirmed the order of forfeiture of security deposit. It has further observed that the respondent herein may apply for fresh licence with fresh security deposit, in accordance with law. 2. We have heard Smt. Manjula K.S. for Sri. N.R.Bhaskar, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel for the appellant. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eous and therefore, this Court may consider. It is submitted that the proprietor cannot get away from the liability on the mere ground that his employee did not properly take care for observance of the regulations. She submitted that the penalty was properly imposed and the appellate Tribunal has erroneously interfered with the order of the first authority. Hence, this Court may consider. She also relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. M/s. K.M.Ganatr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Further, the agreement between Ganeshan to give certain percent of profit to Vijayakumar had transpired and therefore, the goods were cleared in the name of V.J. Enterprises. Tribunal also found that Vijayakumar has signed all the papers and therefore it is not a matter where the import has taken place on the name of the parties which did not exist at all. Another ground which has weighed the Tribunal was that the respondent had engaged Sri. T. Saravanan and it was on account of no proper care t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced Search


Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 IT

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

21-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| 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