9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (Technical) Shri D. Haldar, AC(AR) for the Appellant None for the Respondent. ORDER Per Bench : Two appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the Order-in- Original No.03/Commissioner/CE/Haldia/Adjn./2009 dated 30.01.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Haldia Commissionerate, Kolkata. Revenue has also filed a Misc. Application for ROM against the Final Order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cating authority for non-imposition of penalty against the two co-noticee is that these EOUs are situated outside the jurisdiction of the Haldia Commissionerate. The appeal already filed by Revenue against the impugned order was allowed vide Final Order dated 14.05.2018. Against such decision the Department filed Misc. Application for ROM against the following observations made in the final order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, ld. DR submitted that the adjudicating authority was in error in taking the view that no penalty can be imposed against these EOUs for the reason that they were situated outside the jurisdiction of the Commissionerate. He argued that the criteria to determine jurisdiction for adjudication is the place where the offence was committed. Since the offence committed was within the jurisdiction of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as committed. In view of the fact that the alleged offence has been committed within the Haldia Commissionerate, we find that the show cause notice, proposing penalty against the two co-noticees under Rule 26 is justified. 6. After going through the record, we note that the investigations undertaken by the Revenue has established that M/s. Monalisha Garments has claimed receipt of duty free mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
