Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 232 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (9) TMI 232 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - SSI Exemption - manufacture and clearance of finished goods with the brand name belonging to M/s. Gulshan Metal Works - availing benefit of exemption small scale industries and not paying any excise duty - Held that:- no effort has been made by Revenue to establish with documentary evidence, the manufacture of such goods in the assessee's premises. What has been done in the quantification of demand is to simply consider all goods seized from various pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

m the assessee's factory with the brand name belonging to M/s. Gulshan Metal Works has been arbitrarily valued on the basis of a price list found during the search at one of the premises. - No effort has been made to investigate and ascertain the actual transaction value. The Commissioner (Appeals) has concluded, on the basis of the transaction value claimed by the assessee, that there is no case for demand in-as-much-as the total value is well within the SSI limit during the relevant finan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Appellant Mr. J.P. Kaushik, Advocate For the Respondent ORDER Per Mr. V. Padmanabhan The present appeal has been filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal dated 19.06.2006 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Delhi. The respondent assessee is a manufacturer of sliding door rollers, window rollers, drawer fittings, bed plate fittings, steel/ aluminium brackets, rings, wheel castors for chairs/tables, etc. having their premises at 487, Peeragarhi village, Delhi. They .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

alised by the original authority vide his order dated 30.11.2005 in which demand of duty to the extent of ₹ 36,67,103/- was made against the respondent along with imposition of penalty of an equal amount and charging of interest. Further, a demand of ₹ 33,324/- was also made against M/s. Hind Packers and Traders along with levy of interest and equal penalty. Personal penalties were also imposed to the tune of ₹ 2 lakhs each on various connected individuals. 2. When the original .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l . During the search proceedings undertaken by Revenue on 13.09.2002, hardware goods bearing both the above brand names were found and seized from the premises of the assess, SRU and the godowns of M/s. Hind Packers and Traders. In the original proceedings before the adjudicating authority, it was concluded that the value of goods cleared by the assessee bearing its own brand name Flyrail Runwell , during the proceedings under consideration was within the limit specified for availing small scal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand against the assessee on the following grounds:- (i) The original authority has proceeded to confirm the duty on the assessee on the assumption that all goods seized from various premises with the brand name Flyrail Fixwell owned by M/s. Gulshan Metal Works was fully manufactured in the factory of the assessee. He has held that there was no basis for adjudicating authority s conclusion. He has recorded a finding that on the basis of sales tax regi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hi premises for completion of some part of the manufacturing process before clearing the finished goods with the brand name of M/s. Gulshan Metal Works on their own invoices. (ii) He has also found serious misgivings in the valuation adopted by the original authority in quantifying the value of clearances. He has given a finding in his order that the valuation adopted in the investigation was based on a price list found during the search on one of the parties, which was set to be effective from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see. 4. Revenue challenged the above findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that it has been made without basis. 5. We have heard Mr. GR Singh, ld. Departmental Representative for Revenue and Mr. J.P. Kaushik, ld. advocate for the assessee and perused the records. In the original proceedings, demand of duty has been made against assessee on the allegation that they have manufactured and cleared with finished goods with the brand name belonging to M/s. Gulshan Metal Works. We find t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version