9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'BLE MR. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Appearance: None for the Appellant Mr. C. Mallikarjuna Reddy, A.R. for the Respondent. [ORDER PER: ASHOK JINDAL] As both the appeals are arising out of common issue, therefore both of them are disposed by a common order. 2. The facts of the case are that initially, on 01.05.1999, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellants alo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide order dated 19.12.2008 partly allowed the appeal against the main party i.e. M/s Mayura Alloys Industries Ltd. As no appeal was filed against the dropping of penalty on the appellants the question of passing of order by the Tribunal does not arise. This Tribunal also remanded the matter to reconsider the issue in regard to demand of duty on MS wire, GI wire and barbed wire against M/s. Mayura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority 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. 6. In view of this, we do not find any merit in the order of imposing penalties on the appellant. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
