9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, penalty is not sustainable, is not acceptable – penalty are justified – since penalties can’t be imposed simultaneously on proprietor & proprietary concern, hence penalty on proprietor is set aside - E/3697-3700/2006-SM(BR) - 474-477/2008-SM(BR)(PB), - Dated:- 7-3-2008 - Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President Shri Kishan Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri V.K. Agarwal, Jt. CDR, for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the penalty was imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules but sub-clause of Rule 173Q is not mentioned in the show cause notice or in the order-in-original, therefore, the penalty is not sustainable. 3. Ld. SDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the goods were cleared under the bogus invoices and this fact has been admitted by the dealers of the manufacturers. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e above decision is not applicable on the facts of the present case. The contention of the appellant is that sub-clause of Section 173Q of Central Excise Rules has not been mentioned in the show cause notice, therefore, penalty is not sustainable. The appellant relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amrit Foods v. CCE reported in 2005 (190) E.L.T. 433. In this case, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
