9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposition of penalty in terms of Rules 9(2) and 173Q and also under Rule 209A of CE Rules is under challenge in this appeal. The Commissioner has imposed these penalties in terms of his Order-in-Original No. 1/2000, dated 31-8-2000 in terms of show cause notice dated 16-7-1998 issued by the Commissioner proposing to impose penalty under said Rules. The aspect pertaining to the confirmation of du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Counsel relies on the judgment rendered in the case of Jain Shudh Vanaspathi Ltd. reported in 1990 (49) E.L.T. 179. He also submits that the subsequent proceedings are barred by time and therefore, the subsequent penalty proceedings and levy of penalty is required to be set aside. 3. The learned DR reiterated the departmental contentions. 4. On a careful consideration, we clearly see the po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t jurisdiction as the issue had already been concluded with the passing of the Order-in-Original No.6/97 dated 12-6-1997. The Calcutta High Court judgment in the case of Jain Shudh Vanaspathi (supra) have clearly held that additional show cause notice had already been adjudicated resulting in passing of an adjudication order and the officer had become functus officio. In this case also there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
