TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arances of dummy units have to included, it is not only difficult but imposible to recognise as to who is the principal manufacturer, on whom the duty liability can be fastened. The operative portion in the adjudication order fixing the liability for payment of duty and penalty by all the appellants, jointly and severally, clearly shows that the Revenue has recognised implicitly all the appellants as independent units. Hence, without categorically specifying or bifurcating as to who is the principal manufacturer and who are the dummy ones, floated with a view to conceal clearance of principal manufacturer, confirmation of duty demand will not stand for judicial scrutiny. The SSI exemption provided under Notification No.01.03.2001 cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearance of 3 manufacturing units namely, Manish Dresses, Manish Garments Manish Apparel. The Central Excise duty demand of ₹ 11,99,595/- alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty were confirmed against the appellants on the ground that M/s.Manish Dresses has mis-utilised the SSI benefit provided in Notification No.8/2001 (CE) dated 01.l03.2001, by not accounting for the clearance value of its other units M/s. Manish Garments and M/s.Manish Apparels in its books of accounts. 3. Shri Manish Saharan, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the adjudication order has confirmed the duty demand on all the appellants jointly and severally without specifying which appellant in this case is the principal manufacturer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... support of confirmation of duty demand and for imposition of penalty. i. The Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 11,99,595/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh ninety nine thousand five hundred ninety five only) payable on clearances of finished goods is demanded form Noticee No.1, 2 3 jointly and severally under proviso to section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. As Noticee No.1 to 3 have already paid the duty, the same is adjusted against the demand. ii. Penalty of ₹ 11,99.595/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Ninety Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Vive only) is imposed on Noticee No. 1, 2 and 3 jointly and severally under Section 11AC of the Centgral Excise Act, 1944. 6. On perusal of the above order, it reveals that the adjudicating a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the principal unit. Though the Revenue has filed Civil Appeal against the decision of Tribunal in the case of Shiva Exim Enterprises (supra), the Honble Supreme Court have dismissed the same holding the view taken by the Tribunal. The relevant portion in the judgment dated 16.07.2015 of the Honble Supreme Court [reported in 2015 (322) ELT A 32 (S.C.)] is extracted herein below:- Having regard to the findings which are recorded in Para 3 of the impugned order, particularly the facts that notice was issued to both the units and it is nowhere pointed out in the show cause notice as to which unit is the principal unit and which is the dummy one, we are of the opinion that Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
