2012 (4) TMI 514

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l submits that the same Commissioner (Appeals) should not have acted prejudicial to the interest of justice. While the assessee faced penalty of Rs. 164282/-, it went in appeal before ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The said authority by an order No. 109 waived the penalty in para 9 of the order. The order so passed was communicated on 1-8-2011. 2. It was also submitted by learned Counsel that agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uliar appeal which clearly reflects non-application of mind by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) who has neither looked into order passed by him two months back nor also was aware of the powers entrusted on an Appellate Authority envisaged by Section 35A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Proviso to sub-section (3) to Section 35A mandates that an order enhancing any penalty shall not be passed unless an ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X