IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CEA No. 72 of 2008 Date of decision: April 21, 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate, Chandigarh ..... PETITIONER VERSUS Ashish Gupta, Gali No. 1, Adarsh M/s Escorts Limited (TED), Faridabad ..... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Central Govt. Standing Counsel, for the appellant. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant appeal is directed against the order dated 08.06.2007 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (Annexure P-3), whereby it has been recorded by the Tribunal that the respondent was not concerned with the excisable goods, which was subject matter of dispute in the present case. In para-5 of the order passed by the Tribunal, the aforesaid finding could be noticed and by reference to Rule 209 A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, it has been concluded that penalty could be imposed only in respect of excisable goods, which would necessarily mean those goods, which are subject CEA No. 72 of 2008 -2- matter of proceedings by issuance of show cause notice. The aforesaid position is further clarified by the order of the Commissioner dated 30.09.2004 (Annexure P-2) where it has been categorically found that in the show cause notice there was absolutely no role of any of three firms in the present case, which were alleged to be managed by inter-alia the respondent-Ashish Gupta. In the background of the aforesaid factual position and pure finding of fact, we find that no question of law warranting the admission of the appeal would arise. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. ( M.M.KUMAR ) JUDGE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE April 21, 2009 pj