9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Shri P.K. Shukla, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Both the stay petitions are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by Commissioner vide which, while confirming demands of duties against M/s. Lauls Limited, the has, inter alia, imposed penalties of Rs. 10,00,000/- upon Shri Abhay Gupta, Director of M/s. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dealers on commission basis. The appellant's contention is that he only contacted the dealers and introduced them to M/s. Lauls Limited for the purpose of buying the raw material. If the dealers have issued only invoices without supply of raw materials, he cannot be held liable to penalty. It also stands contended before us that penalty has been imposed under Rule 26, without referring to any sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which are not shown to be distinguishable. Accordingly, we hold that the amended provisions will not apply to the acts committed prior thereto." 4. We find force in the above, submissions of the learned advocate. The appellant acted as a broker only and was not concerned with issuance of invoices without supply of goods. He was working on commission basis. Admittedly prior to 1-3-07, the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im under Rule 26 without mentioning any sub-rule. As such, at this prima facie stage, we are of the view that the appellant is entitled to unconditional stay from the condition of pre-deposit as also from recovery. We order accordingly.
5. Both the stay petitions are allowed in above terms.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in the open Court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
