9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order]. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I am of the view that the appeal itself requires to be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, I proceed to dispose of the appeal. 2. The original authority had imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on Sri Adesh Kumar, proprietor of M/s. Ankur Offset Packaging under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te authority on 23-3-2006 and the same was received by the addressee on the next date. It is submitted that it was without considering this application that learned Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded to dismiss the appeal on the aforesaid ground. It is pointed out that the appellate authority noted in the impugned order that no reply had been received from the appellant as of date to the interim dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and delivered on 24-3-2006. The time given for pre-deposit expired only on 25-3-2006. Thus it appears that, before the expiry of the time allowed for pre-deposit, the party s response in the form of modification application was available on record. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have considered the said application on merits before proceeding to dispose of the appeal. It also appears that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ara 5.4 of the EXIM Policy had imposed restrictions on disposal of imported goods. It appears from the records that the goods were imported by one party and sold to another and that the appellant procured it from the latter. The party between importer and the appellant, viz. M/s. Madhu Offset Printers, Hyderabad, has not been penalized. On these facts, I have found prima facie case for the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
