TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue. The issue relates to the clubbing of clearances of five units. Shri M. Chandra Sekharan, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants raised preliminary objection that appeal is not maintainable inasmuch as issue with reference to clubbing of clearances cannot be heard in isolation without hearing the other affected parties. He said that at the first instance, show cause notices were not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hem - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 201 and submitted that in the similar facts and circumstances, the appeal filed by the Department has been dismissed as per Order No. 412/2000-C dated 21-7-2000 in Appeal No. 2131/93-C in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. M/s. High Land Dye Works. 2. Dr. Ravinder Babu, ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue, submitted that all the five units were not independent units but were organi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, firm was charged for clubbing of clearances but show cause notice was served on the partners, hence notice issued to the partners was non-est in law. The firm is a separate legal entity from its partners for the purpose of Central Excise Act and hence service of notice on partners cannot be said to have served notice on the firm. Further the appeal filed by the Department against the four units ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lal Sons reported in 1999 (113) E.L.T. 597 as well as in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. M/s. High Land Dye Chem, held that appeal by the Department against only one firm without impleading other firms is not maintainable when clearances of all the units are proposed to be clubbed. 4. In view of the foregoing conclusion, we do not find any substance in the appeal filed by the Department and accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
