2008 (3) TMI 314

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r : K. Raviraja Pandian, J.].- The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed against the final order No. 728 of 2006, dated 10-8-2006 on the file of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai by formulating the following questions of law: "1. Whether the Honourable CESTAT can deny to entertain an application filed under the valid provisions of law established for f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of duty as applicable to Heading 84.71 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. The Department after investigation came to the conclusion that M/s. AMPL supplied semi-finished goods to M/s. ACPL and had undervalued the goods with a view to benefit the buyer, who was found to be related to the seller. It was found that both the Companies were controlled and managed by Shri Chander Kothari. On the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er filed an appeal before the CESTAT against AMPL in appeal No. E/832/1999. 3. Before the Tribunal, it was contended on behalf of M/s. AMPL that inasmuch as no appeal had been filed by the Department as against M/s. ACPL against whom only the demand of duty was proposed in the show cause notice, the present appeal against M/s. AMPL was liable to be dismissed. The Department admitted before the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The Board        has directed the Commissioner to file an appeal to the Tribunal against all the three parties viz., M/s. ACPL, M/s. AMPL and Shri Chander Kothari. As against M/s. ACPL only the demand of duty was sought to be recovered. As against M/s. AMPL and Shri Chander Kothari, penalties were sought to be imposed that because of the non-filing of appeal agai....