1994 (2) TMI 196

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... stay applications, for dispensing with the pre-deposit of Rs. 4,63,403/- towards duty and Rs. 50,000/- towards penalty on Shri C.N. Sukumaran and penalty of Rs.10,000/- on Shri V.S. Hirusah. Since, both the matters have emerged from the same order and as such the same are disposed of by this common order. 2. Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, the learned advocate, has appeared on behalf of the appellants. He pleaded that in the case of Shri Hirusah vide Order-in-Original dated 15-10-1992 an adjudication was made and allegation for clearances of Rs. 30 lakhs were reduced to Rs. 17 lakhs approximately in that case and a search was effected on 8-11-1990 on the appellant's premises. He pleaded that the brand name "Lavanya" belongs to Shri Hirusah....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y be treated as a statement across the Bar as per the instructions from his client. He pleaded for the dispensing of the duty and penalty amounts. 3. Shri A.K. Singhal, the learned JDR, who has appeared on behalf of the respondent, pleaded that the plea of deduction of duty from the price was duly taken by the appellant before the Collector and the same was not accepted. He further argued that the appellant cannot plead that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in this case. He argued that in the earlier adjudication Shri Sukumaran was not a party and as such the appellant cannot take this plea before the Tribunal. He pleaded for the rejection of the stay applications. 4. We have heard both the sides and have ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../-, Rs. 50,000/- as penalty and Rs.10,000/- penalty by Shri Hirusah, it will amount to undue hardship. We were told during the course of arguments that after the calculation of duty in terms of provisions under Section 4(4) (d) (ii), the duty will works out to Rs. 2,20,405.60 and this view of recalculation was confirmed by the various decisions of the Tribunal. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispense with the pre-deposit of the duty amount of Rs. 4,63,403/- and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the condition that Shri Sukumaran should deposit Rs.60,000/- ( Rupees Sixty thousand only) within 3 months from today. We are also of the view that if Shri Hirusah is desired to deposit the penalty amount of Rs. ....