9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicates that the penalty-related issue was not debated, nor in fact was it open to debate. This was because the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) were correctly understood by the bench and it was clearly held that the assessee was not to be penalized where the allegation of suppression of facts, levelled against them, was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) and that view was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s application points out that the final order did not advert to one of the prayers contained in the memo appeal, which reads thus : Set aside the demand (remanded for re-computation) and penalty of Rs. 14,96,039/- imposed on the appellants. The grievance raised by the applicant at present is that there is no order as to penalty. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the lower appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manding the matter to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue debated before it. The final order passed by this bench indicates that the penalty-related issue was not debated, nor in fact was it open to debate. This was because the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) were correctly understood by the bench and it was clearly held that the assessee was not to be penalized where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise Act. Obviously, the applicant entertained a doubt as to penalty despite the above favourable findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). It is this doubt which has been expressed today before us through the present application. In this scenario, we think, we have to make the operative part of the final order a little more clear to the applicant. Accordingly, we are of the view that on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
