SIYARAMJI GUPTA AND ORS. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the same question of law and facts arise, all these three appeals are being disposed of by a common order.

(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.