9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on behalf of the Managing Partner contesting the personal penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs imposed on him, it is difficult to believe that another appeal was not filed by the Hotel. In view of this matter, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have considered the appeal as having been filed on the date of receipt of the covering letter. In our opinion, in this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have heard the appeal and stay application filed by the appellants and taken a decision in accordance with law. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders and remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the stay application as well as the appeal in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the appellants. - Decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t OIO No. 12/2010-11 dated 31.3.2011. It is also noticed from the covering letter that there is a signature with date and round seal of Office of the Commissioner (Appeals). However only one appeal number has been written on the covering letter. Subsequently, they got intimation for personal hearing of only one appeal filed by the Managing Partner. They wrote a letter intimating the Commissioner (Appeals) that they had filed one more appeal on behalf of the Hotel also. It is the submission of learned counsel that matter was pursued by them every time personal hearing was fixed and intimated and finally ex-parte order was passed against the Managing Partner directing to deposit an amount of ₹ 5 lakhs for hearing the appeal. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the fact remains that in this case, the covering letter which we reproduced above would show clearly that 2 sets of appeal papers filed by M/s Hotel Ashok and Sri Ashok G. Koti were enclosed and the same was acknowledged also. When the appeal was filed on behalf of the Managing Partner contesting the personal penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs imposed on him, it is difficult to believe that another appeal was not filed by the Hotel. In view of this matter, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have considered the appeal as having been filed on the date of receipt of the covering letter. In our opinion, in this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have heard the appeal and stay application filed by the appellants and taken a decision in accordance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
