9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s is department s appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. RS/25-26/SRT-II/2006, dt. 29-1-07. 2. There is a request for adjournment by the learned advocate appearing for the respondent, which is being rejected. Heard the learned SDR. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows : (a) The original authority vide his order dt. 24-9-04 confirmed the demand of duty amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Control Administrator - 1986 (23) E.L.T. 523 (Tribunal). 5. I have carefully considered the grounds of appeal and submissions made by the learned SDR. The findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in setting aside the separate penalty on the partner is reproduced below : 9. Now, I discuss the penalty of Rs. 70,000/- imposed on Shri Sajid J. Udhi, partner of the appellant unit u/s 112 of Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cited supra, relied upon by learned SDR relates to Gold (Control) Act, in which there was a presumption when an offence was committed by a company, then every person who at the time of offence was in-charge of the company or was responsible to the company for the conduct of business shall be deemed to be guilty in terms of Section 93 of Gold (Control) Act. 7. The above decision may not be releva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
