9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Shri Rohan Shah, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - These six appeals are against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bombay II. 2. In that order, the Commissioner, adjudicating on a notice issued to Grauer & Weil (India) Ltd. the assessee, and to Umesh More, Vasant Kulkarni, Suresh Parekh, (its Managing Director, Vice President, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t possible to accept that Hi-fin was not an independent legal entity. She finds that it was registered with the Directorate of Industries with an independent premises at Dahisar. The manufacture of electroplating chemicals was carried out by the employees who were paid by it and the liability borne by it. She emphasises that "there is no financial flow back between Hi-fin and Grauer & Weil, either ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chemicals" supplied by Grauer & Weil. There is no knowledge of their identity. It is however not possible to agree that manufacture of electroplating chemicals were complicated. The Commissioner says it is a simple process of mixing. The appeal itself cites the statement of Shirodkar to say the chemicals procured from the market are mixed with the chemicals supplied by Grauer & Weil. The mere fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner rightly found, some degree of financial relationship between the two companies or flowback of money from Hi-fin, the so-called front or shell of the actual manufacturer is necessary. There is no such evidence cited in the notice by the department, nor is it claimed that there is any close personal relationship between the person to any or control and Agarwal who is the proprietor of Hi-fin. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
