Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 241 - AT - Central ExciseMaintainability of appeal - Jurisdiction - Same company operating with two registrations with two Different PAN - SCN were issued by the Officer in the particular position and so were the Orders-in-Original - appeal dismissed for non-prosecution - Petitioner first filed the appeal before the wrong forum - Later, after transfer of appeal, failed to make pre-deposit - Petition failed appear before the Tribunal - they again failed to appear before the Tribunal in the remand proceedings - recovery of differential Central Excise duty along with interest and penalties. Jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- In the hierarchy of the Department of Customs & Central Excise, below the Commissioner are the Additional/Joint Commissioner, both are at the same level and the officer after completing some years of service as Joint Commissioner, is granted a non-functional selection grade and is called Additional Commissioner instead of Joint Commissioner. It is not the case that the Joint Commissioner is subordinate to the Additional Commissioner or Additional Commissioner is supervisory authority for the Joint Commissioner. Therefore, at the same post one occupant of the office could be an Additional Commissioner and his successor could be a Joint Commissioner or vice versa - In this case, if the Additional Commissioner has issued the show cause notice and his successor Joint Commissioner decided the matter, we find no infirmity at all in such a decision. As far as the contention that the Unit at Puddukkottai was a joint venture between the appellant and M/s Godavari Prestressed Pipes & Structures Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, there is nothing in the records to show that a different legal entity has been created or that a PAN has been taken in the name of a different legal entity. In both the units (at Hyderabad and Puddukkottai), the registration was done in the name of Taaher Ali Industries & Projects Pvt. Ltd. i.e. the appellant. Evidently, one legal entity should have been only one PAN. Since the Central Excise Registration is PAN based, once an application is made along with correct PAN, only one Central Excise Registration can be issue - On a perusal of the joint venture agreement entered into by the appellant and M/s Godavari Prestressed Pipes and Structures Pvt. Ltd., it is seen that the name of the joint venture “Taher Ali Industries & Projects Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad” with the same address as the appellant. Both the units at Hyderabad and Puddukkottai, Tamilnadu are functioning in the name and style of “Taher Ali Industries & projects Pvt. Limited”. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|