Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2004 (10) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Shri D.N. Chaudhary, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. -  This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has enhanced the penalty under Rule 96ZP(3) against the appellants. 2. The learned Counsel has contended that since the duty had already been paid along with the interest, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing authority imposed penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Rules on the appellants keeping in view the payment of duty already made. The Commissioner (Appeals) on an appeal filed by the Revenue against that order of the adjudicating authority, had enhanced the penalty equal to the duty amount detailed above, but he has not recorded any reasons for making this enhancement. He has lost ....