2015 (11) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... T.Mathivanan, JJ For the Petitioner : Mr.S.P.Harikrishnan For the Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas,Sr.Standing counsel JUDGMENT V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. These appeals are by three different assessees, questioning the correctness of a common order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, directing them to make a pre-deposit of a portion of penalty levied upon them.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls. 4. Therefore, search of the premises of M/s.Sindhu Textiles was conducted. On the basis of the enquiries and searches conducted, it was found that M/s.Sri Sairam Exports had purchased the consignment from one M/s.J.M.Fashions, which is the appellant in C.M.A.No.2164 of 2015. Therefore, a show cause notice dated 24.5.2006 was issued to the partners of all the three companies. The show cause ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s.Sindhu Textiles. Different penalties were also imposed upon the individual partners. 5. As against the order in Original, the appellants herein filed individual appeals. Along with the appeals, they also took out applications for waiver and stay. By a common order dated 29.01.2008, the Tribunal directed M/s.Sri Sairam Exports to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- out of the penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....not lie against such orders and that only a statutory appeal would lie under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act 1944 or under Section 130 of the Customs Act. Therefore, the appellants have come up with the above appeals. 7. The only grievance of the appellants is that after having recovered the entire amount of duty drawback allegedly claimed unlawfully to the extent of Rs. 12,22,923/-, the....