TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to as M/s. JEE) with the clearances of M/s. Jifcon Tools Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as M/s. JTPL) and by denying the benefit of SSI exemption notification. In addition, personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh, each has been imposed upon both the manufacturing units along with imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 25,000/- each on the other individual appellants. 2. As per facts on records, M/s. JTPL is a Private Limited Company having three Directors, Shri R.M. Kalaskar, Shri. S.C. Bora and Mrs. A.S. Mehra. The said unit is engaged in the manufacture of cutting tools from 1979 onwards and were availing the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No. 80/80-C.E., dated 19-6-80 as amended from time to time. They were operating from Plo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng penalties upon various persons. 4. During adjudication, appellants took a definite stand that M/s. JTPL as also M/s. JEE are two independent firms/local entities having their own capital and infrastructure facilities. Reliance was placed upon the following documents :- 1. Separate premises 2. Separate SSI registration 3. Separate Sales Tax number/assessed separately 4. Independent Electrical connection of MSED. 5. Independently financed by MSFC 6. Special Capital Incentive and SEED capital independently sanctioned 7. Separate water connection from MIDC to the respective plots 8. Working capital loan from bank - CC limit sanctioned independently 9. Holding independent Excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cient to hold the two units as one. Similarly, where the orders were placed upon the M/s. JTPL and they were not in a position to honour the same, the same were transferred to M/s. JEE by proper amendment of the purchase orders. M/s. JEE was granted a Central Excise licence after the visit of the officers and after verifying the ground plan and their machineries installed therein. Classification list was approved after making the enquires. As such, extended period could not have been invoked against them and there is no justification for levy of penalty. 6. The Commissioner did not accept the above submissions of the appellants and observed in the impugned order that the permission by MIDC to divide the plot and sell the same to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of judgments pronounced by the Tribunal to show that commonness of Directors and partners, occasional transfer of raw materials, same company staff, transfer of purchase order by one unit to another will not make them one unit for the purpose of clubbing, as long as each unit is having complete set of machine required to manufacture the goods in question. We note that all the incidence referred to by the Commissioner are in the nature of common business relations between the two units and cannot be made the basis for holding M/s. JEE as dummy of M/s. JTPL. We also note that M/s. JTPL is a limited company whereas M/s. JEE is a partnership concern. We may here refer to Board's Circular No. 6/92 dated 29-5-92 clarifying that limited companies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
