9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (4) TMI 400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant. Shri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Mehta Cold Forge, Nasik and M/s. Nasik Industrial Engineering Corporation, Nasik were engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under TI-52 and 68 of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. They were availing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d goods were also removed from the premises of one factory to the premises of the other. Scrutiny of records revealed that partners of both units had close functional interests in each other s business. Statements of various partners were recorded. From the investigations, it appeared to the Department that there was mutuality of interest between two units in the business of each other and that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the matter remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. Vide the impugned order-in-original, the Collector has held that one unit started functioning from 1958 itself and the other unit in 1970/71 well before the coming into force of the respective SSI exemption notifications and, therefore, it cannot be said that the second unit was created only for the purpose of ineligible availment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re dismissed as time barred. In the present cases also, we find that the Revenue has filed the present appeals within the statutory period of limitation and subsequently the Revenue filed appeals against M/s. Mehta Cold Forge (this is an obvious mistake since the appeals of the Revenue against M/s. Mehta Cold Forge was filed in 1993 itself within the statutory period of limitation - the Revenue sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
