TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 532
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 29-3-2012 [2013 (292) E.L.T. 479 (Tribunal)]. 2. It is common ground that there is a partnership firm of which the appellant is the partner. That partnership firm is stated to be assessed for payment of Central Excise Tax. The partnership firm Sunil Forging & Steel Industries carries on business of manufacturing of goods - rods by using basic raw materials. The firm was receiving orders and therefore, the articles which it was using and supplying were classified by it under Tariff 7326 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The firm's claim was examined under certain exemption notifications. However, the allegation is that the officers of the Headquarters (Preventive), Central Excise, Belapur, visited the premises of the firm, s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umstances, on application, no order was passed. Apprehending that the penalty which is imposed on him now will be recovered taking recourse to coercive means that the instant appeal has been filed. 3. These facts have been undisputed throughout. The Tribunal seems to have taken a view that unless and until the partner independently files an appeal, he or she cannot impugn the directions of imposition of penalty against the partner. Therefore, the individual partner must impugn it. Though, the individual in this case has failed to file separate appeal, however, it is equally undisputed that he has signed memo of appeal of the firm as a partner. He has affirmed its contents. In such circumstances, a hyper technical view and by insisting....