2008 (9) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0% Of the target and therefore was levied penalty' under Section 11 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. It is unable to get over this order and of levy of penalty by the adjudicating authority, in appeal before the appellate authority notwithstanding one round of litigation before this court and having even failed to make a pre-deposit of 10% of the penalty amount before the appellate authority and the appellate authority having dismissed the appeal looking into the merits, the petitioner is before this court seeking for quashing of adjudication dated 23-12-1999 copy of which is produced at Annexure to the writ petition and the order of appellate authority dated 15-9-2005 is at Annexure-E to the writ petition, 2.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gument is totally devoid of merit for the reason that the firm acts only through its partners and import by a partnership firm is in turn only by the partners. Hence, no need to issue show cause notice to every partner of the firm, but what is important is, if any partner failed to avail of the opportunity and if the adjudicating authority was constrained to observe that the petitioner-firm was only seeking adjournments and not availing the opportunity, it is definitely not a case of want of opportunity. Therefore, the ground of not providing opportunity does not sustain. 6. So far as the argument that the authority should have shown the awareness to extend the benefit of Provision under Paras 128A and 128B of the policy is concerne....