9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this appeal is whether the word 'or' used in sub-clauses (3)(a) & (3)(b) of Section 35D of C.E.A. 1944 should be read as 'or' or as 'and'. 2. Arguing the case for the appellants, Shri J.S. Agarwal, ld. Counsel submits that sometimes the word 'or' is to be read as 'and' when it comes to exercising jurisdiction. He submits that in ordinary usage 'and' is a conjunctive and 'or' is disconjunctive. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D are distinct. So they cannot be read in conjunction. The intention is clear if we read the words as they are. He submits that had the legislator the intention of giving overall power limiting to a certain amount of duty and penalty together, then perhaps, they would have used the word 'and' not 'or'. Ld. DR submits that there is nothing ambiguous in the word used in the above two sub-clauses of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty happens to be Rs. 8 lakhs and penalty Rs. 20 lakhs, how the jurisdiction will be determined. We find that in our view as expressed above, duty and penalty are to be considered independently and the clauses are to be read in the example cited by the ld. Counsel. Since penalty exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs, the appeal shall be heard by the Division Bench and not by a Single Member Bench on the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
