9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als against these respondents. Despite that, appeals have been filed against the respondents. I have also perused the appeal memorandum. There is no prayer in the appeal memos. Appeals filed by the Revenue seek no relief against these respondents. I do not understand why these appeals have been filed before this Tribunal when there is no proposal by the Committee of Commissioners to file these appeals before this Tribunal against the respondents nor any relief has been sought in the appeals against the respondents during the course of arguments. - Decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal Nos. 2759,2760, 2761 & 2763 of 2009- (SM) - ORDER NO. FO/53163-53166 /2015-Ex (SM) - Dated:- 7-10-2015 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rst date of the month succeeding the month in which they had availed the said Cenvat Credit till the time they have paid the said amount under the provisions of Section 11 AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The amount of interest shall be calculated by the Divisional Officer and intimated to the noticee within 15 days of the issue of this order. v) I impose a penalty of ₹ 17,77,263/- upon M/s. Auto Engineers under Rule 13(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. If the balance amount of confirmed Cenvat Credit demand along with interest is deposited by M/s. Auto Tech Engineers within 30 days of receipt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by learned AR is that their names have been recorded inadvertently. He further submitted that penalty on proprietor M/s. Bhagwati Trading Company is to be imposed. 5. On perusal of the impugned order, penalty on all the respondents have already been imposed by the adjudicating authority and by filing these appeals against these respondents by the Revenue, no specific relief has been sought. I have also perused the order of the Committee of Commissioners advising to file appeal before this Tribunal and on perusal of the said Review order, I find that Committee of Commissioners has not proposed to file appeals against these respondents. Despite that, appeals have been filed against the respondents. I have also perused the appeal memora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri Rupesh Bansal, director of M/s. Ayushi Steel Company (Pvt.) Ltd. Faridabad and proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Trading Company Faridabad. Both S/Shri Rakesh Bansal and Rupesh Bansal who by virtue of their acts of omission and commission are part of larger conspiracy and are involved in the loss of revenue in blatant violation of the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 and rules made thereunder. They have, therefore, rendered themselves liable for penal action under Rule 25 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It thus requires to be reviewed under Section 35 of the Act to the extent of imposition of personal penalty. The Committee, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 35E of the Central Excise Act directs the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
