2003 (2) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e petition was filed as far back as on 23rd November, 1989, the Respondents have not chosen to file any affidavit in reply till date. When the matter came up for hearing on 20th January, 2003, Counsel for Respondents sought time with a view to file an affidavit in reply to the petition.  In the interest of justice, the request was acceded to and the petition was adjourned.  However, even....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the matter, we have decided to dispose of the matter on merits instead of remanding the matter back to the adjudicating authorities for adjudication of the show cause notices.  The Original Petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 have died during the pendency of the petition and accordingly their names have been deleted. 3.In this petition, the Petitioners have challenged to show cause notice dated 14th ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submitted that the said decision has become final. There is no denial from the revenue on this aspect.  No case is made out for distinguishing the case of the petitioners with that of Mr. Sule and other Directors.  In this view of the matter, we see no reason to permit the Respondents to adjudicate the show cause notice qua the Petitioner No.1.  Accordingly we hold that the issues ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the functionary of the company.  However, the Collector levied penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on the company. On an appeal by the company, the said penalty was reduced to Rs. 50,000/- by CEGAT and the same has been paid by the company.  In this view of the matter and especially when there is no material with regard to personal involvement of the Petitioner No.1 we see no reason to sustain the ....