9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 873X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Meerut-II at Noida, hence they are taken together for disposal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Rubber Sheet, Rubber Pipe, PVC Pipe, PVC Hand Rail & PVC Water Stopper. The manufacturing unit was inspected by Central Excise Officers on 26/03/2003 wherein they had found some hand written paper slips showing some information about incoming and outgoing goods. Investigations were carried out and various statements were recorded. It appeared to Revenue that the said paper slips were record of clandestinely manufactured and cleared goods by the manufacturer-appellant. Further, it appeared to Revenue that manufacturer-appellant cleared approximately 25% of the goods manufactured by them t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ossed their SSI Exemption of Rs. 1 Crore for each financial year and therefore, the appellants were issued with a Show Cause Notice dated 06/11/2003 demanding Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 5,55,992/- under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and further there were proposals for imposition of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the other appellants to this appeal. The demand of duty was raised against appellant M/s Deep Jyoti Rubber Pvt. Ltd. The appellants contested the said Show Cause Notice and submitted before the Original Authority that the various statements were recorded which did not establish as who is the author so-called loose slips/sheets and therefore, the said loose slips/sheets were not cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri D. K. Jain, Director of M/s Deep Jyoti Rubber Pvt. Ltd., Shri Abhishek Jain S/o Shri D. K. Jain under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Further imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Gate Keeper of M/s Deep Jyoti Rubber Pvt. Ltd. through Order-in-Original dated 29/07/2005. Being aggrieved by the said order, appellants preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) decided the said appeal through impugned Order-in-Appeal No.137-140/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2005 dated 30/12/2005, wherein the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the said Order-in-Original dated 29/07/2005. Being aggrieved by the said order, appellants preferred appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the ld. Counsel for the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old to both of them were same. He has further submitted that this Tribunal has held in the case of Motorol Speciality Oils Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara reported at 2009 (243) E.L.T. 449 (Tri. Ahmedabad) that it is necessary that the adoption of price charged by related person on the basis for arriving at assessable value arise only when the assessee so arranges that all the goods are sold by him only through the related person. He has submitted that it is an admitted fact that all the goods were not sold through M/s Rubber Traders India Pvt. Ltd. and therefore, the allegations of under valuation does not sustain. He has further submitted that since both allegations of clandestine manufacture of goods and un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
