2018 (9) TMI 375 - AT - Central Excise

SSI Exemption - N/N. 08/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 - dummy units or not? - Clubbing of clearances - crossing of threshold exemption limit - Held that - The individual manufacturing appellants have independent identities since the revenue could not establish that their books of accounts are common, that their bank accounts are common, that their registration with Income Tax, Sales Tax are common and that there is common funding and that there is mutuality of interest and that there is financial flow back and that the units which were held to be dummy did not have any manufacturing facility - In the absence of any such evidence, it is held that the manufacturer units are independent units and therefore, their clearances could not be clubbed together. Denial of benefit of SSI Exemption to the manufacturer appellants is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Denial of benefit of SSI Exemption under Notification No.08/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 to manufacturer appellants.
- Clubbing of clearances of manufacturer appellants by the Revenue.
- Challenge of the order dated 31.01.2012 before the Tribunal.
- Adjudication of liability on each assessee individually.
- Sustainability of denial of SSI Exemption and confirmed demands against manufacturer appellants.

Analysis:
1. The appeals arose from Order-in-Original No. 09/Commr./Meerut/2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Meerut. The Revenue proposed to deny the SSI Exemption benefit to the manufacturer appellants based on a show cause notice issued on 16.12.2010. The Revenue claimed that the clearances made by the manufacturer appellants exceeded the exemption limits under the notification, leading to a demand of Central Excise duty amounting to ?1,01,02,232 for the period from 2006-07 to June 2010. The Tribunal previously observed that duty and penal liability cannot be assessed jointly against various assesses and remanded the matter to adjudicate the liability on each assessee individually.

2. The Original Authority had clubbed the clearances of all units run by the same family members, denying the SSI Exemption benefit and confirming duties against individual appellants. The appellants argued that the clubbing of clearances was unjustified, citing a Tribunal decision in a similar case. They highlighted that the units had separate registrations under various authorities, maintained records independently, had different locations, raw materials, final products, and bank accounts, with no common funding or managerial control. They contended that the finding of the Original Authority was unsustainable.

3. The Revenue supported the impugned order, but the Tribunal found that the individual manufacturing appellants had independent identities. The Tribunal noted the absence of evidence to establish common books of accounts, bank accounts, registrations, funding, or mutual interest among the units. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the manufacturer units were independent entities, and their clearances should not have been clubbed. Therefore, the denial of the SSI Exemption benefit and the confirmed demands against them were deemed unsustainable.

4. In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed all the appeals with consequential relief, in accordance with the law.