2009 (4) TMI 162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- as required under the Rules. The total outstanding amount was paid subsequently in installments and the payment was completed on 4-7-2003. 2. After issue of show cause notice and adjudication proceedings the demand for interest of Rs. 2,80,015/- was confirmed and penalty of Rs. 70,000/- was imposed on 20-12-2005. 3. In the meantime M/s. Prince Paper Mills closed down their operations and the appellants took over the property and the department required them to pay the interest and penalty which was not paid by M/s. Prince Paper Mills. An appeal was filed by the appellant against the letter of Superintendent requiring them to pay interest and penalty due from M/s. Prince Paper Mills. In the impugned order Commissioner (Appeals) held that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alf of the Revenue submits that having given an undertaking and accepting all the liabilities against M/s. Prince Paper Mills, the appellant cannot turn around now and say that they are not liable. She further submitted that as per the law department cannot compel a person to give an undertaking since once application is made for registration is deemed to have been granted. It was open to appellants to challenge the requirement of the department. Further, she also relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Macson Marbles Pvt. Ltd. wherein it was held that even though a person takes over the business as a result of auction conducted by the State Financial Institution, he would be liable to pay excise dues as per Rule ....