9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taken up for disposal. This was so done. 2. The facts of the case leading to the appeals are that a SCN was issued on 8-8-1989 alleging that M/s Parkeen Brothers situated at Mumbai and M/s Pharma Machinery P. Ltd. situated at Nashik had common ownership, had mutuality of interests and had financial flow back between them. It was proposed to club the clearances and seek recovery of duty short levied on that count. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai I vide his order dated 25-11-1997 confirmed the demand amounting to Rs. 1,24,290/-. He imposed penalties of like amount on M/s Parkeen Brothers. He also imposed the penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on M/s Pharma Machinery. He also imposed penalties on the Directors in the Private Ltd. co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals) however, on 31-12-1998 passed an order holding that the issues were not settled, and they would need examination at length on the basis of facts and evidence. On this observation he directed the assessees to make a pre-deposit of the total disputed amount of duty and penalty. The application for modification was filed on 19-1-1999, in which it was once again submitted that the very issue of clubbing of the two units stood decided in the orders of the Commissioner Aurangabad dated 25-11-1993 for the same period for which the same issue had been decided against him by the Deputy Commissioner. The ld. Commissioner in dealing with this application held that he had considered the same observation, that the appellants had f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... propositions and thus, therefore, can be clubbed. (e) I agree with the assessee that there is no evidence to doubt the sale being made to M/s Parkeen Machinery Co. and the Show Cause Notice also does demand any duty on the basis of favoured buyer theory. (f) In view of the above findings I cannot sustain the demand being made in the present show casue notice based on clubbing of the firm with the assessee on merits. 4. We have also seen orders dated 22-12-1993 and 28-11-1994 passed by the same Commissioner in which similar findings were made about the same units which orders relate to the period May, 1987 to January, 1989 and May 1990 and March 1993 respectively. We have also seen the subsequent decision dated 14-11-1997 in which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
