TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a notice was issued to - (i) M/s. Mayur Print N-Pack (hereinafter referred to as M/s. MPP) (ii) M/s. Arihant Arts (hereinafter referred to M/s. AA) (iii) M/s. Ganga Packaging (hereinafter referred to as M/s. GP) (iv) Mr. Malsi Thawar Rita (v) Mr. Ramji Thawar Rita (vi) Smt. Maniben Malsi Rita (vii) Smt. Jayshree Ashok Rita (viii) Smt. Champaben Velaji Rita While MPP was declarant unit under the Central Excise Act Rules, was enjoying the benefit of exemption on Printed Cartons, was managed by Mr. M.T. Rita, a partner, the two other firms, viz. M/s. AA and M/s. GP, operating from Mr. M.T. Rita s residence were floated to obtain in eligible exemption on cartons since they did not have any factory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which payment was made by M/s. MPP. (c) The adjudicator relying upon Shree Agencies case [1977 (1) E.L.T. J168 (S.C.)] dropped the proposal of clubbing the clearances of M/s. GP with M/s. MPP after finding that Mr. Malsi T. Rita had not floated M/s. GP as dummy or camouflage unit for availing benefit of SSI Notification 1/93. (d) However, regarding the material on records as regards finance management control, mutuality on marketing, raw material, recommended plant and machinery and common advertisement, he found that M/s. MPP is the main unit. M/s AA is a dummy unit and therefore the turnover of M/s. MPP is to be clubbed with the turnover of M/s. AA to arrive at and to determine the benefit available under SSI exemption Noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 42/92, dated 24-9-1992 by the Office of same Commissioner, who has adjudicated the case. A perusal of these circulars and the learned Dy. Legal Advisors of Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs Union of India s advice dated 29-12-77 on which the Circulars and Trade Notice has been based and issued and is found to the effect - 2......... If there are two firms with only some of the parties in common, each firm is entitled to separate exemption limit and hence distributing the exemption may not arise . Boards instructions vide Para (ii) of letter F.No. 211311SGCXM1, dt. 10-8-96 addressed interalise to Collector of Central Excise Bonds The relevant para reads as - (ii) As mentioned above, if there are to firms with only some ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd are not permissible, the duty demands made on M/s. MPP cannot be sustained. The same are required to be set aside. (d) When entitlement to SSI benefit separately granted to both firms i.e. M/s. MPP and M/s AA, the penal liability and that too in a consolidated manner, without arriving at a conclusion whether it is either on M/s. MPP or M/s. AA cannot be upheld. The order of penalty should in clear terms visit the person on whom it is intended. The order is silent on that aspect. Such consolidated penalties have not been approved by this Tribunal. Each rule has separate maximum limit, therefore from the order, application of mind should be apparent from the penalties imposed. In this case, from the consolidated penalty as ordered tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
