COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DAMAN Vs. SPECIALITY POLYMERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved with that part of Commissioner (Appeals)s order, vide which he has set aside the penalty on the partnership firm, while upholding the penalties on the partners, Revenue has filed the present appeal.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned SDR, I note that the Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand of duty against the respondent M/s. Speciality Polymers along with imposition of penalty upon them and penalties imposed on partners under the provisions of Central Excise Rules as also under Customs Act. The said order was appealed against by the appellant before Commissioner (Appeals). As regards duty confirmation, he upheld the order of the authorities below. Inasmuch as the said part of the impugned order confirming duty and interest is not the subject matter of the appeal filed by the Revenue, details of the same are not being gone into.

(3.) A short point in the Revenues appeal is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that penalty cannot be imposed on the partnership firm as also on the partners. By observing so, he has set aside the penalty on the partnership firm. Revenues grievance is that though the Commissioner (Appeals)s order holding that separate penalties should not be imposed on the partnership firm as also on the partners, is correct in the light of Honble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Jupiter Exports as reported in 2007 (213) E.L.T. 641 (Bom.), he should have set aside the penalties on the partners and not on the partnership firm.