TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Court is of the opinion that there is no question of any fallacy in the demands made. The present petition is a glaring abuse of the process of Court - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - W.P. (C) No. 1429 of 2017 and CM APPL. Nos. 6545-6546 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 17-2-2017 - S. Ravindra Bhat and V. Kameswar Rao, JJ. Shri Kumar Vikram, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount, i.e., ₹ 38,96,221/- under Section 28 of the Customs Act was also imposed. The personal penalty was imposed on the present petitioner, i.e., the proprietor as well as two other individuals. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal to the CESTAT which rejected it. His further appeal to this Court was dismissed; he met with the similar fate with the review proceedings. Ultimately, ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 8 lacs towards personal penalty under no circumstances can be said to discharge him of the liability to pay the balance amount that he was responsible for as the sole proprietor of Ashoka Metal Industries. Considering that what he is in substance seeking is discharge from his entire liabilities without disclosing if and when the amounts were paid, the Court is of the opinion that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
