TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neers and connected appeal is by its partner Shri B.C. Sharma. The firm is engaged in the manufacture of Nuclear Power Project Plant/Machinery and their part thereof. Even though they were receiving Central Excise Duty from the customers, it was not passed on to the Central Govt./Deptt. So, show cause notice was issued, demanding duty to the tune of Rs. 6,24,407.88. Company filed detailed objectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... side. Remaining part of the adjudicating authority was confirmed. Hence this appeal. 2. When the appeal came up for final hearing, ld. Counsel representing the appellant firm did not dispute the duty liability of the firm. According to learned Counsel, the firm was rightly found liable to pay duty amounting to Rs. 6,24,407.88. So the said demand against the firm is confirmed. 3. Argument advan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h that penalty. 4. M/s. Agro Engineers Ltd., Jaipur is a partnership firm. That firm has been imposed a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs. Thereafter we do not find any justification for imposing any penalty on partner of that partnership firm. So the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed on Sh. B.C. Sharma, Partner of that firm is vacated. 5. In view of what has been stated above, we dismiss the appeal 2696/9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
