TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord that the adjudicating authority vide his order dated 29.10.2004 dropped the penalty proposed in the show-cause notice against the appellants. The order of dropping penalty was never challenged in any subsequent proceedings.. Therefore, in remand proceedings for third party, penalty cannot be imposed on the appellant. There are no merit in the order of imposing penalties on the appellant - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n took place and vide order dated 31.03.2000, the adjudicating authority imposed penalty of ₹ 10,000/- each on both the appellants and confirmed the demand against the main appellant. The said order was challenged by all the parties before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 29th January 2004 remanded back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the issue. In remand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty on the appellants. Against the said order of imposition of penalty on the appellant, appellants are before us. 3. None appeared on behalf of the appellants but written submissions have been filed requesting that as the penalties were dropped against them by the order dated 29.10.2004 passed by the adjudicating authority dropping penalty against the appellant was never challenged, therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
