2023 (4) TMI 320

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: Shri Ashish K Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri G. Kirupanandan, Superintendent (AR) ORDER RAMESH NAIR These appeals are directed against Order-In-Appeal whereby the order of the Adjudicating Authority was upheld except reduction of penalties. 1.2 The brief facts of the case are that investigating officer visited factory of the appellant and conducted the stock verificatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) while passing order- in- appeal taking a lenient view reduced the penalty from 35000 to 10,000/- and on Shri. Amit Gupta from 50,000/- to 20,000/-. However, remaining part of the order was upheld therefore the present appeal filed by the appellant. 2. Shri. Ashish K Singh, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the difference in sto....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... which was not allowed by the adjudicating authority, therefore, there is a gross violation of principles of natural justice in passing the adjudication order. As regard the penalty imposed on Shri. Amit Gupta he reiterates the grounds of the appeal. 3. Shri. G. Kirupanandan, Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. I hav....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....panchas. As regard appeal of Shri. Amit Gupta partner of M/s A Kumar Industries, I find that without going into the merit, it is settled law that once the penalty is imposed on the partnership firm it's partner cannot be imposed penalty separately. This issue has been considered and settled by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Jai Prakash Motwani - 2010 ....