2015 (9) TMI 84

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was not maintainable as upon whom penalty was imposed along with respondent has not been made party – Even company was not made party to this appeal – Since judgment of Tribunal had become final this appeal challenging penalty imposed upon respondent would not be maintainable – Tax Appeal dismissed and order of confiscation set aside – Decided in favour of Appellant. - Tax Appeal No. 761 of 2007 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1993? 3. Before answering the substantial questions, we find that this Tax Appeal is not maintainable as Pankaj Manubhai Shah upon whom penalty of ₹ 40 lac was imposed along with the penalty of ₹ 40 lac imposed upon the present respondent vide order dated 30th October, 1997, has not been made party in this appeal. Even the company has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and another director, namely Pankaj Manubhai Shah are concerned, this appeal challenging the penalty imposed upon M/s. Bharatbhai Ajitrai Doshi would not be maintainable. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, we dismiss this Tax Appeal as the order of confiscation has been set aside and that has not been challenged and has become final. Consequently, the penalty imposed pursuant to order of confiscatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X