9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chna Pandey Mittal, Joint Chief Departmental Representative, for the Appellant. Shri Vikrant Kackria, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order] - Revenue filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed on the respondent. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that M/s. Monga Brothers Limited, Ludhiana (in short "the manufacture") were engaged in the manufacture of Iron Steel Ingots and availing Cenvat credit on the inputs. Show cause notice dated 22-7-2003 was issued by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise of the manufacturer, alleging that the manufacturer availed irregular Cenvat credit amounting to R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007 (214) E.L.T. 19 (Tri.-LB) = 2007 (7) S.T.R. 502 (Tri.-LB) = 2007 (81) R.L.T. 572 (CESTAT-LB) held that partnership firm is not different or distinct legal entity or personality from its partners which is applicable in the case of proprietorship firm, as in this case. 4. The learned Advocate on behalf of the respondent submits that the case proceeding was intiated on the allegation that the respondents issued fake invoices whose factory is situated at Mandi Govindgarh and, therefore, penalty can be imposed by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Mandi Govindgarh. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly held that penalty cannot be imposed on the firm under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 as held by this Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al in this context) who is competent to adjudicate the cases. The chief criterion to determine jurisdiction in Central Excise cases is thus the place where the offence is committed, (ii) In respect of customs cases however, the principle to be applied in respect of seizure and adjudication is not the same as stated in the preceding sub-paragraph. Section 110 of the Customs Act gives power to the proper officer to seize any goods if he has reason to believe that such goods are liable to confiscation under the Act. There is no reference in this Section to the place at which such seizure can be effected. As such the seizure can be effected at any place and the case adjudicated by the competent officer under whose jurisdiction the goods were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
