2001 (11) 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

....]. - Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order-in-appeal dated 10-5-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, the appellants have come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Patent and Proprietary Medicines and Medicaments with Shri A.K. Agarwal, Shri M.D. Gupta and Smt. Sushila Agarwal. Shri A.K. Agarwal, Shri M.D. Gu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hem along with interest under Section 11AB of the Act, besides imposing penalty of Rs. 11,00,000/- under Rule 173Q read with Section 11AC of the Act. The Deputy Commissioner also imposed penalty of Rs. 30,000/- each on the partners, namely, Shri A.K. Agarwal, Shri M.D. Gupta and Smt. Sushila Agarwal under Rule 209A of the Rules being partners of the firm. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, set a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned order regarding the imposition of penalty as imposed by the Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. We have heard both sides and gone through the facts on record. 6. In the case of Punjab Recorder Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh, supra, it has been ruled by the Tribunal that in the absence of apportionment of penalty under Section 11AC of the Act and Rule 173Q of the ....