TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 266
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Sh. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate- for the appellant Shri Satya Pal, AR- for the respondent ORDER The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order. 2. The facts of the case are similar issue arise in all the appeals, therefore, they are taken up together for disposal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the investigation was conducted of M/s Nab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount of penalties were imposed. Aggrieved from the said orders, the appellants are before me. 4. Sh. Surjit Bhadu, Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of the M/s Ashoka Steel Industries. A request for adjournment have received from the M/s Aggarwal Steel Rolling Mills on the ground that their advocate is down with severe Jaundice and not capable to attend this office. None appeared on behalf of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stances, the impugned orders are to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. AR opposed the contention of the Id. Counsel and submits that in some of the case, the appellants have admittedly that they have received inputs from M/s Nabha Steels Ltd. and M/s Pushpanjali Steel Alloys Pvt. Ltd. clandestinely, therefore, those goods have ultimately used by these appellants to manufactur....