TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 840X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t No. 2 are two units of the same parent company, i.e., M/s. Century Textile & Industries Ltd. and do not have the status of independent legal persons. It is also clarified by the ld. Advocate that though accounting of the two units is separate but a common balance sheet is being prepared. As such the mines which were allotted to Maihar Cement at the time of its incorporation and subsequently allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities have admitted that the issue is covered by the Apex Court decision in the case of Vikram Cement reported in 2006 (197) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.) but have denied the credit on the ground that the mines are not captive mines of the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that inasmuch as the mines served to Maihar Cement as also to Maihar Cement Unit No. 2, the appellant, it cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y M/s. Century Textile Industries. As such both the units, i.e., Maihar Cement and Maihar Cement Unit No. 2 belongs to the same parents company and is required to be treated as one in the eyes of law. Merely because both the units are separately registered with the Central Excise Deptt., as per the provisions of Central Excise Law, they do not become different entities. He further clarifies that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the units are separately registered with the Central Excise authorities. The above criteria adopted by the lower authorities will not advance Revenue s case inasmuch as registration of different units under Central Excise law cannot be held relevant for finding out the status of two units. There is no dispute about the fact that Maihar Cement as also Maihar Cement Unit No. 2 are two units of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The subsequent decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Cement reported as 2010 (257) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) also supports the appellant s case inasmuch as the mines in question are not supplying to factory of other assessees. 7. In view of the above foregoing discussion, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. (Pronounced in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
