9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Mac Electronics, Ahmedabad and for alleged evasion of duty and non-accountal of T.V. sets by M/s. Mac Electronics, a duty demand on 127 T.V. sets was confirmed against them and a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed on M/s. Telerad. The Collector also ordered confiscation of the 2 T.V. sets seized from the possession of M/s. Telerad, but allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 500/-. The present appeal is only against the duty demand and also the order of imposition of penalty. 2. At the outset Shri S.A. Dave, the ld. advocate made it clear that he does not challenge the order of confiscation of the T.V. sets seized from their possession. He would also indicate that another 15 T.V. sets seized from M/s. Mac Electronics were also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ets on their behalf and hence, in the absence of such declaration, it is to be considered that M/s. Telerad were manufacturing the T.V. sets in the factory of M/s. Mac Electronics. Shri Dave pleads that these findings are totally contrary to the findings and direction of the Board. The Collector seems to have made out a new case against the appellants. Hence, the duty demand is not sustainable. He also submits that they have paid in advance the duty amounts for the clearance to be effected by M/s. Mac Electronics. If M/s. Mac Electronics have cheated the Government by not paying the duty, as a Central Excise Assessee, the duty cannot be demanded again from them. Since they have not committed any clandestine removal, penalty also should not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectronics have been paying duty and clearing the goods, but in respect of 127 T.V. sets, they are alleged to have removed them without payment of duty. Shri Dave also pleaded that all the duty amounts for the removals have been paid by them to M/s. Mac Electronics and they are not party to the fraud of illegal removal. Moreover, in the context of the Apex Court decisions in the cases of Kerala Electricity Board and Ujagar Prints, so long as it is established that the job worker is not a dummy and when the contract is for job work to be done by an independent unit, that job worker should be considered to be a manufacturer. In this case, there is no whisper of allegation that M/s. Mac Electronics are a dummy unit or a division of M/s. Telerad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
