2003 (8) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal, filed by Sh. A.K. Tantia, against imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. 2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Additional Commissioner, in Order-in-Original No. 23/99, dated 2-6-99, confirmed the demand of duty against M/s. Best Board Ltd. besides imposing penalty; that the Additional Commissioner also imposed a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f any discussion by the Adjudicating Authority as regards personal involvement of the Managing Director penalty cannot be imposed under Sec. 112 of the Customs Act. Reliance has also been placed on the decision in the case of Autolite (India) Ltd. v C.C.E., Jaipur, 2002 (146) E.L.T. 345 (T). 3. Countering the arguments Shri P.M. Rao, learned D.R. submitted that Shri Prem Shankar Gupta, Pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ect the appellant with the illegal activities going on in the company for evasion of Central Excise duty. Shri Prem Shankar Gupta had connection with Sh. A.K. Tantia only to the extent of production pattern and not to the extent of clearance pattern of the goods from the factory. It is settled law that before the penalty can be imposed under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Departm....