TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may be a different matter whether penalty can be simultaneously on the firm as well as on the partners - appellate authority set aside the penalty on the ground that in the show cause notice, relevant clause of Section 112 of the Act was not mentioned, which vitiated the order - held that no prejudice shown to have been caused to noticees by ommission to specify relevant clause of Section 112 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee attempted to evade the duty and goods imported against the documents issued in lieu of export, were held liable to confiscation and duty which had been exempted was ordered to be recovered with interest. Penalty was also imposed on the exporter. Apart from penalty on the firm, personal penalty on partners was also imposed. 4. The appellate authority set aside the penalty on the ground that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 112 of the Act and such omission could not per se vitiate the penalty. Learned counsel for the Revenue has relied upon judgment of this Court in Customs Appeal No. 8 of 2007 (Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar v. M/s. ATM International, Jalandhar and others), decided on 23-8-2007 [2008 (222) E.L.T. 194 (P H)], wherein also identical view was taken. 9. Learned counsel for the assessee has not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. It may be a different matter whether penalty can be simultaneously on the firm as well as on the partners. This question does not arise for our consideration at this stage. We leave the question open to be considered by the appropriate authority. 13. In view of our answer to the question raised, we set aside the order of the appellate authority and remand the matter for a fresh decision in ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
