9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 901X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the transaction in question was undertaken by one Sita Ram Aggarwal - Held that:- Appeal filed against the order dated 3rd June, 2011 was dismissed by this Court on 9th February, 2012. At that time, it was submitted by the appellant that other points were also raised before the tribunal, but were not answered and decided. It was in these circumstances that in order dated 9th February, 2012 it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (tribunal) has opined that law does permit review and, therefore, the application was dismissed. He relies upon order of the High Court dated 9th February, 2012. 2. To our mind, this is not the correct reading of the impugned order dated 31st October, 2012. In paragraphs 2 and 3 of the said order the tribunal has recorded the foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of appeal is dismissed." 3. In other words, the clear finding recorded by the tribunal is that the merits as such was not argued before them when order dated 3rd June, 2011 was passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. At that time, as per the tribunal, only one question was argued that the appellant herein was not personally involved and the transaction in question w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is loss cannot be recovered because such licenses get sold to third parties. Considering this aspect the penalty of Rs.3.00 lakhs imposed is reasonable and does not require interference by this Tribunal." 4. Appeal filed against the order dated 3rd June, 2011 was dismissed by this Court on 9th February, 2012. At that time, it was submitted by the appellant that other points were also raised befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
