9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 721X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we note that two siblings were engaged in the manufacture of talcum powder, goods specified for SSI purpose during the material period (2005-06). The brother manufactured the goods during the first-half of the financial year and stopped the activity before the limit of aggregate val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the brother and proposed a penalty on him and at the same time proposed a penalty on the sister. The challenge against the demand of duty at present is by the brother. The sister is challenging the penalty imposed on her. 2. After examining the records including the provisions of the SSI Notification (No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003 as amended) and hearing both sides, we note that both the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of one or more manufacturers clearing the specified goods from a factory . Without prejudice to this case of the assessee, it is further submitted that demand of duty, if otherwise sustainable in law, could only be on the sister who manufactured the goods during the second-half of the financial year. On the other hand, the Revenue has taken the view that the siblings manufactured the specifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidered as manufacturers who manufactured and cleared the specified goods from the same factory . A contra construction of condition no.(vi) is likely to defeat the very purpose of the condition. In this view of the matter, prima facie, we have not found strong case for the brother against the demand of duty on the goods cleared from the factory in excess of the prescribed exemption limit durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
