TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alt with the same - confiscation lacks merit - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Central Excise Appeal No. 3799 to 3803 of 2005 - Final Order No. 53905-53909/2016 - Dated:- 4-10-2016 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President and Mr. B. Ravichandran, , Technical Member Shri Amresh Jain, A.R. for the Appellant/Revenue Present J.P. Kaushik, Advocate for the respondents ORDER These five appeals are filed by Revenue against the impugned order dated 7.9.2005 of Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Delhi 2. Brief facts of the case are that the main respondent (Shri Ram Udyog) are engaged in the manufacture of sliding door rollers, window rollers, drawer fittings, bed plate fittings, steel /aluminum brackets, ri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rers namely M/s Shri Ram Udyog and M/s Gulshan Metal Works were manufacturing excisable goods by affixing brand name of some other persons and the value of clearance of individual manufacture exceeded the limit of ₹ 1 crore during the year 2002-03. As such, he held that they were not required to obtain Central Excise Registration and to pay duty. Accordingly, he set aside the confiscation of seized goods except the goods valued at ₹ 40,286/- seized from the premises of M/s Hind Packers and Traders as they had brand name of another person and hence not entitled for SSI exemption. He upheld the redemption fine imposed on these goods, however he reduced the penalty imposed on M/s Hind Packers and Traders. 4. Revenue is in appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... machinery installed therein belonged to both the concerns. During investigation proceedings, these facts have been brought out. Shri Ashok Narula is the main person behind the family concern namely M/s Gulshan Metal Works. M/s Hind Packers and Traders is also the family concern owned by his son Shri Rohit Narula. Since this is family concern controlled by Shri Ashok Narula, Revenue alleged that the impugned clandestine removal to be attributed to individual units is only in the knowledge of Shri Ashok Narula. The Department has no means to find out the exact turnover with reference to each unit to bifurcate the clandestine removal for duty liability. 8. We find that the grounds of appeal did not bring out any material fact or legal pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
