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

....vil 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 filing such applications? 2. Whether Ho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 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 conclusion arrived at as above, a show cause not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....PL 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 Tribunal that no separate appeal has been filed e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 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 against the dropping of the proceedings pertaining to M....