9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue. 2. The ld. Consultant submitted that he is contesting only the penalty and the interest amount. He submitted that in view of the decision in the case of M/s. Alfa Chemical Ind. reported in 2002 (145) E.L.T. 454 (Tri. - Delhi), separate penalty on partnership firm and their partners is not permissible. Therefore, he contended that the penalty imposed on the partner is not permissible. Sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in Para 8 is misconceived. 3. The ld. JDR appearing for the revenue contended that the Adjudicating Authority has clearly recorded in his order that the partnership merchant manufacturers (all twelve) have not filed any defence reply. Therefore, his contention is that the point of reply having been filed by the consultant cannot be taken into account. He also submitted that there is no retra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Roop Milon Prints I find that the officers have seized the grey challans from the Mills relating to the respective merchant manufacturers from whom the Mill had received the grey fabrics for processing and removed back to them after processing and attain the respective merchant manufacturers have sent another grey fabrics to the Mill to compensate the illicit removals. Thus, I find that the docu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds, I find that the case is based on admission of the partner of the appellant. Therefore, in these circumstances, I find that the penalty has rightly been imposed and the interest levied. However as regards the penalty on the partner the same is not maintainable in view of the decision in the case of Alfa Chemical Ind. (supra), the penalty on the partner is, therefore, set aside. 5. Except the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
