9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vinash Thete, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. We have heard the learned SDR Shri Avinash Thete, for the Revenue and Shri Nimesh Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. The respondents herein M/s. Pince Plastoware Ltd. is engaged in manufacture of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent disentitled to the benefit of the same. On the above belief, the officers of DGAE, who visited the respondent's factory on 29/30-1-00, seized the stock of final product available in the factory premises. The show cause notice was issued, which was adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner confiscating the goods as also imposing penalty upon the respondent. On appeal against the above order, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it and loss account - Court held that place of business not being same, the factories are to be treated as distinct and a separate licence for each of them to be granted. The judgment of this case is squarely applicable to the present case. I further place reliance upon the following cases on the issue. * Tamil Nadu Newsprints & Paper Ltd. v. CCE Coimbatore - 2001 (135) E.L.T. 1214 (Tri. - Del.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Revenue, in their appeal, has raised same grounds, on which the original adjudicating authority relied upon. We note that apart from the fact that the two units have to be considered as independent units, the dispute in the pre sent appeal is as regards confiscation of seized goods and imposition of penalty. No duty demand stand confirmed in the impugned order of Joint Commissioner. We are infor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
