2014 (10) TMI 11

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es) Rules, 1995. A confusion is tried to be created in the name of the firm upon whom the aforesaid notice is issued. It is an admitted position that one Maram Laksmi Narayana was carrying on the business, which attracts the excise duty, as proprietor in the trade name and style of "Shree Ganesh Forging Co." The said proprietor defaulted in payment of excise duty and a proceeding was initiated. Subsequently, the proprietor died and according to the department the fact of the death of the said proprietor was not communicated. The proceeding was culminated into an order. It further, came out that one of the sons preferred an appeal against the said order before the Tribunal but subsequently withdrew the same. According to the petitioner, afte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppears that after the death of the father one of the sons continued the business as a proprietor thereof which was later on converted into a partnership firm upon execution of a deed of partnership. This Court, therefore, does not find any strength on the submission of the petitioner that both the proprietorship concern and the partnership firm are two separate distinct entity rather the documents annexed to this writ petitioner suggests that the said proprietorship firm continues and later on converted into a partnership firm. 5. The statutory, liability which accrued to a proprietorship concern cannot be said to have evaporated because of the action of the erring parties. There is more strong reasons in support of the above that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emsp;Admittedly, the proceeding was initiated after the introduction of the proviso in the year 2007 though for a earlier period. 9. The proprietor who was alive at that point of time did not take any such plea. Nor this Court, has been apprised of such fact when an appeal by one of the sons who is also the partner of the partnership firm to be aforesaid plea in an appeal filed before the Tribunal. Since the appeal abates it necessarily implies that the original order stood affirmed. 10. This Court, therefore, does not find that aforesaid plea could at all be taken at the instance of the petitioner before this Court more so, at the stage when the notice is issued contemplating to take action relating to the attachment of the pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X