9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the personal hearing also. After hearing the appellant and taking note of the fact that appellant is an individual and from the submissions made, it was felt that appellant has got into trouble because of ignorance of law and also peculiar circumstances which were explained in detail. We consider that appellant deserves another chance to defend himself and to make his detailed submissions. Accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reproduced below. * Appellants are the advisors and consultants in the field of Municipal Solid Waste Management, waste to energy power infrastructure projects, among others. * Appellant entered into EPC contract for implementation of two power projects with M/s. Yuvaraj Power Project Ltd. (YPPL) in December 2009 and with M/s. Bee Pee Power Ltd. (BPPL) in August 2010; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct through the bank accounts and in these cases also the amounts were paid back through their group companies. Even though there were three projects, the two other projects were totally shelved and only project relating to 13 MW capacity power plant at Vemagiri village in Kadiyam Mandal of East Godavari Dist. (A.P) usage was to be completed at a cost of ₹ 108 crores. It was submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t since the appellant did not reply to show-cause notice at all and did not attend the personal hearing also. After hearing the appellant and taking note of the fact that appellant is an individual and from the submissions made, it was felt that appellant has got into trouble because of ignorance of law and also peculiar circumstances which were explained in detail. We consider that appellant dese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
