9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chnical) Shri Vinay S. Sejpal, Advocate for the appellant Shri V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Comm. (AR) for the respondent Per: Raju These appeals have been filed by M/s. Kaishar Interiors P. Ltd. (KIPL) against confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 173Q appeal has also been filed by Shri Prakash Pandya against imposition of penalty under 209A. 2. Ld. counsel for the appellant argued that KIPL are interior contractors who received contract for undertaking interior including civil, plumbing, electrical, fire fighting etc. and also sourcing and supplying of furniture items both fixed and loose. He pointed out that the clients appoint professional architect/ interior designer to design and int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 12.02.2013 observed as follows:- 6. We have gone through the remand order passed by the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to re-adjudicate in view of the evidence collected and relied upon in the subsequent show cause notice. The adjudicating authority in the present case held that Shri Sharma, sub-contractor, made a general statement which is relied in the subsequent show cause notice that the furniture which was fabricated and fixed at the site is fabricated by him on labour charges. In the subsequent show cause notice there was a specific charge that loose furniture is manufactured in the factory of the appellant and the same has been cleared to the cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) manufactured by sub-contractors namely M/s. K.L Sharma. ii) Offloading of the work to Diwan Sons iii) Manufacture at site iv) Fixed vs. Movable furniture He pointed out that these issues have been settled by the earlier decision of the Commissioner dated 01.03.2011 and the decision of the Tribunal dated 12.02.2013. 4. Ld. AR relied on the impugned order. 5. We have gone through the rival submissions. It is seen that the issue raised in the instant case are - i) manufactured by sub-contractors namely M/s. K.L. Sharma. ii) Offloading of the work to Diwan Sons iii) Manufacture at site iv) Fixed vs. Movable furniture The said issues have been settled by the order of Commissioner and Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
