9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 761X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent ORDER Per: M V Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: US/30/RGD/2013 dated 29/01/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai - II. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. The issue that falls for consideration in this case is whether the appellant needs to be saddled with the liability of penalty for not discharging tax l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (26) STR 3 (Kar.), as also on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur - II v. Galaxy Construction Pvt Ltd 2017 (48) STR 37 (Bom.). 5. The learned Authorised Representative reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 6. On perusal of the records we find strong force in the contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Act, 1994. This view of ours are fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Adecco Flexitone Workforce Solutions Ltd (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Galaxy Construction Pvt Ltd (supra). 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case and the authoritative judicial pronouncements, we hold that the adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
