SIYARAMJI GUPTA AND ORS. Vs. CCE
LAWS(CE)-2015-3-61
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on March 19,2015

Siyaramji Gupta And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
CCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.V.RAVINDRAN,MEMBER (J) - (1.)AS the same question of law and facts arise, all these three appeals are being disposed of by a common order.
Heard both sides and perused the records.

(2.)THE issue involved in all these appeals is regarding penalties imposed on the appellants under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2002.
(3.)LEARNED Counsel Shri Nimesh Mehta is appearing on behalf of the appellants Shri Krishna Sahebrao Patil Dongaonkar and Shri Ramnath Bhanudas Patil, while the appellant Shri Siyaramji Gupta is not represented. Learned Counsel took me through the impugned order; submits that the question of imposition of penalty under Rule 26 may not arise as the appellant is not company but Shri Krishna Patil Dangaonker is the Chairman and Shri Ramnath Bahudas Patil, Secretary and Ex -Managing Director of the of the assessee company M/s. Gangapur SSK Ltd. are not handling day to day matters. On a specific query from the Bench he would submit that as Chairman and Secretary were not informed that the sugar which has been cleared for export will not be exported and diverted to home consumption.
Learned A.R. would reiterate the findings of the adjudicating authority in the impugned order at para 8.3. He would submit that the Chairman and the Secretary and the MD were aware that the sugar which was cleared for export was not exported and diverted to home consumption. According to him the statement recorded of Shri Siyaramji Gupta, Exporter, is very clear indicating that they have informed that the sugar which has been cleared for export has not been exported and the amount requires to be paid to department which he had kept with the assessee.

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.