2026 (9) TMI 8

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... a/w Adv. Niyati Mankad, Adv. Manisha Yadav and Adv. Simran Kazi,. For the Respondent: Adv. Sushanth Murthy,. P. C. 1. The above Appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 8th October 2024 passed by the CESTAT. 2. As far as the present Appeal is concerned, the learned Counsel for the Revenue has tendered modified questions of law which, according to the learned Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tics, and their directors/partners/authorised persons, namely Arun Joshi, Sushil Kumar Upadhyay, Sunil Trivedi, Ramnivas Pareek, and Sunit Jain were allowed, and the appeals of Yogesh Associates, a division of Shree Raj Exports Pvt. Ltd., and the rest of the Appellants were remanded back to the adjudicating authority for a de novo consideration. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Associates), the matter has to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority. This is the mistake pointed out in the impugned order. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent/Assessee, namely, Mr. Arun Joshi, fairly stated before the Court that what was submitted before us by the Appellant/Reveune is factually correct, and as far as the penalty levied on the Respondent herein of Rs. ....