2009 (1) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are attracted – penalty set aside.
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) Dr. M.K. Rajak, SDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order].- Being aggrieved with that part of the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has set aside penalty imposed upon the respondents, imposed by the Original Adjudicating Authority under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, Revenue has file .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nalty under Section 78 is therefore quashed and the penalty under Section 77 is reduced to Rs. 500/- only. The other orders in respect of appellant No.1 are upheld. As regard imposition of penalty on appellant No. 3 Shri Ashokbhai T. Desai, proprietor of appellant No.1, since the proprietorship firm M/s. Meghana Cement Depot. And the proprietor do not have separate identity, as held by the Tribuna .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X