9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (T)]. The brief facts of this case are that M/s. Ludhiana Steels Ltd., Ludhiana inter alia manufactured oxygen gas falling under sub-heading No. 2804.11 in a part of their factory. The unit of the factory which manufactured oxygen gas, was taken over by the appellants - M/s. Bharat Steel Rolling Mills in February, 1995 on lease. The lessor, M/s. Ludhiana Steels Ltd. were themselves r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication was not available if aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption from any factory by one or more manufacturers had exceeded Rs. Three crores during the preceding financial year. The departmental authorities also noticed that M/s. Ludhiana Steel Ltd. and M/s. Bharat Steel Rolling Mills, had a common power connection and the two units therefore did not appear t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the party and further imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them. On the similar facts and grounds, the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-II, Ludhiana in a separate Order dated 4-1-1999 confirmed a duty of Rs. 38,970/- and further imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the party for the clearance effected in March, 1996. 3. The party filed appeals against the above orders but the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Ltd. exceeded Rs. 3 crores. In February, 1995 the unit manufacturing oxygen gas was transferred to the present appellants on lease. It has rightly been observed in the orders passed by the original and the lower appellate authority that as per clause 3(b) of Notfn. No. 1/93-C.E., dated 28-2-1993, the exemption under notification is not available to a manufacturer if the aggregate of the value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be countenanced in view of the facts obtaining in the case and the expression used in clause 3(b) of the exemption Notfn. No. 1/93-C.E. In view of this analysis, the appellants have rightly been denied the SSI exemption under this notification. However, since the present is a case of only a wrong interpretation of the exemption notification by the appellants which does not appear to us intenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
