2007 (11) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ld that the Appellant was a conspirator and considering the provisions of sub-section (a) or (b) of Section 112 was liable for penalty and accordingly upheld the order of penalty which was imposed. The Appellant aggrieved preferred rectification application before the Tribunal which came to be disposed of by order dated 15th April, 2005. The learned Bench of the Tribunal held that the Application .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ping error as no review is maintainable under the Act and what is maintainable is rectification application. That application was heard and the learned Tribunal by its order dated 22nd December, 2006 held that the same points which were raised in the first rectification application were also raised in the second application and consequently dismissed the same. 4. The Appellant has come in Appeal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X