9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. The lower authorities have demanded duty of Rs. 24,17,655/- from the appellants for the months of April and May, 2001 and have also imposed on them a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh. The appellants were availing the facility of fortnightly payment of duty during the material period. When they committed default, the facility was withdrawn for the aforesaid p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed before us, we find that the judgement reported later had been rendered as early as on 13-12-2001 and the one reported earlier had been rendered on 26-11-2002. The two judgments were passed by the coordinate benches of the High Court. The later decision (Vidushi Wires Pvt. Ltd.) emphasizing penal liability of a manufacturer committing default of payment of duty in terms of Rule 8 of the Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted by the following documents :- (i) Order of BIFR declaring the unit sick under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. (ii) Audited Statement of Profit and Loss Account for the year ended 31-3-2005 accompanied by the relevant Balance Sheet. It is noticed that, during the period 2004-05, the company incurred loss of over Rs. 2.7 crores and that the accumulate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
