2000 (11) TMI 377

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. The stay application of the appellant/manufacturer and its Managing Director are taken up for disposal, after hearing the learned Advocate and the learned DR. 2. Consequent to the search and seizure operations conducted by the Anti-evasion Officers, a show cause notice was issued, which as is submitted by the Advocate that the same has not been rec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 09A on Shri Arun Kumar Bansal, the then Managing Director of the manufacturing company. 3. We have considered the submissions made and the case law submitted that the manufacturer is a BIFR company and due to its sickness, the heavy penalty imposed cannot be paid by them. We have also considered that the period of demand in this case is for about 18 months, out of which the period of about only .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Company is a very responsible person under the Companies Act in-charge of the affairs of the company and if clandestine removal of the goods without payment of duty was within his knowledge, the penalty imposed under Rule 209A prima facie appears to be called for. However, keeping in mind the certificate of assets submitted by the appellant, Shri Bansal, we would consider the pre-deposit of Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X