9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst HSG only in respect of Supari received by them from Mahesh & Co. and 306 bags, etc. The matter as regards penalty of various persons is remanded to the Commissioner for judging afresh in the light of the findings of the Tribunal - the learned Commissioner is required to re-adjudge the penalties. The learned Commissioner is directed to dispose of the remanded matter, expeditiously. - ROM Application Nos. E/ROM/50169 & 50222/2015, In Appeal No. E/1580-1581/2007-EX[DB] - MO/70148-70149/2018-EX[DB] - Dated:- 14-12-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Kapil Vaish, C. A., for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the member judicial did not mention anything as regards the appeal of these two applicants/appellants and as there were some difference in the opinion of the two learned members. The difference of opinion was framed as follows: Difference of Opinion Show Cause Notice dated 31.01.2003. (i) Whether demand of ₹ 22,43,58,638/- is required to be remanded as held by Member (Judicial) along with re-dermination of penalty or demand of ₹ 19,51,22,505/- is required to be confirmed as held by Member (Technical) along with imposition of penalty. (ii) Whether demand of ₹ 63,97,85,850/- is required to be set aside as held by Member (Judicial) along with setting aside of penalty or is required to be confirmed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for ₹ 30,31,31,082/- is set aside along with the corresponding penalty as held by learned Member (Judicial). I concur with the learned Member (Judicial) on this aspect. (d) For computation of penalty on Shri Mahesh Singh, Proprietor of HSG I remit the matter to the Commissioner for assessment of penalty, in the light of confirmation of Duty demand on HSG to the extent of ₹ 19,51,22,505/- along with proportionate penalty; (e) Penalty on Shri Mahesh Singh, Proprietor of Mahesh Co. is confirmed to the extent of ₹ 2 Crores as held by learned Member (Technical), which whose conclusion I concur; (f) Proceedings initiated pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.12.2002 and the resultant confiscation of vehicles and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of imposition of penalty on Shri Mahesh Singh, Proprietor of M/s Harsingar Gutkha Pvt. Ltd. is remanded for fresh adjudication by the Adjudicating Authority. 6. Penalty of ₹ 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Only) is confirmed on Shri Mahesh Singh Proprietor of Mahesh Co. 7. The issue of imposition of penalty on Shri Mahesh Singh, Proprietor of M/s Harsingar Gutkha Pvt. Ltd. is remetted to the Commissioner for assessment of the penalty in the light of confirmation of duty of ₹ 19,51,22,505/- (Rupees Nineteen Crores Fifty One Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred Five Only). 8. Proceedings initiated pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.12.2002 resulting in confiscation of the vehicle and imposition of penalty on v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
