2000 (6) TMI 291

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri Deepak Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. - When this matter was called, it was submitted by learned advocate, Shri S.P. Sheth, that the question in this appeal is relating to imposition of penalty on the sole proprietor of the firm and also on the firm and in this case as the application made by the firm under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme has b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....paper and had nothing to do with excisable goods being manufactured by those firms. Shri Sheth in reply submitted that the penalty was proposed in the show cause notice on Shri Tekriwal as proprietor of M/s. Binod Steel and there was no allegation regarding the activities of the role played by him for the other two firms in the name of his wife and daughter. He submit­ted that it is right law ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed DR and cannot find any reason to invoke the separate penalty on the sole proprietor of M/s. Binod Steel as we cannot lay between M/s. Binod Steel and Shri Tekriwal they being one entity. If penalty has been imposed on M/s. Binod Steel and adequately settled under the law the separate penalty on Shri Tekriwal cannot be imposed for the reasons as arrived at in the impugned order. We also find tha....