9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (1) TMI 304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2011 (263) E.L.T. 617 (Tri. - Ahmd.)] raising following questions for our consideration : "(i) Whether the learned Tribunal committed error in setting aside the penalties imposed upon the responsible persons, under Section 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 & Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, specially when all the said persons had admitted their office(s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been imposed. While doing so, the Tribunal did not go into the second limb of the submission of the respondent that penalty on the partners and the partnership firm cannot be imposed. The Tribunal's observations in this regard are as under : "The Hon'ble High Court also took note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs v. Television & Components Limite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the partners under the provisions of two different Acts, without any demarcations, we are constrained to set aside the same on the above ground, in terms of the various precedent decisions of the Tribunal as also the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. As the penalty on the partners is being set aside on the above ground, we are not dealing with the second ground raised by the learned advocate that penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no error in the view taken by the Tribunal looking to the decisions referred to in the judgment of the Tribunal. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal particularly when the Tribunal has not gone into the question of legality of penalty on the partners on the ground that partnership firm has not been visited with the penalty.
Tax Appeal is therefore, dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
