9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed this appeal against the order-in-original dated 26-6-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise whereby the duty is demanded from M/s. Poonam Industries and penalty is also imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. 2. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that a show cause notice dated 27-10-1986 was issued to M/s. Poonam Industries and to the appellant as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the State of Punjab v. Jullundur Vegetables Syndicate reported in 1966 Vol. XVII Sales Tax Cases. She submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after examining the provisions of Punjab Sales Tax held that assessment of a dissolved firm, where the proceedings were initiated before or after the firm was dissolved, can not sustain until the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hagwan Devi Banka and Ors. v. R.B. Sinha and Ors. reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 890 (Pat.) and submits that in these cases High Courts held that recovery proceedings can be made from the property inherited by the L. Rs. He, therefore, submits that the appeals be dismissed. 4. Heard both sides. 5. In this case the duty is demanded from M/s. Poonam Industries and penalty is also imposed under Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court, further, held that even the proceedings initiated before the dissolution of the firm cannot sustain. In the present case, we find there is no such provision in the Central Excise Act or under the Rules. The revenue relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts in the case of Satya Prakash v. Union of India & Ors (supra) and Bhagwan Devi Banka & Ors v. R.B. Sinha & Ors. (supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
