9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are as under: HAPANI FAMILY MEMBERS Name Relation Shri Chimanbhai Hapani Father (Founder & Chairman) CH Shri Bharatbhai C. Hapani Son of CH BH Shri Nilesh (Nitesh) C. Hapani Son of CH NH Shri Dinesh C. Hapani Son of CH DH Ms. Sonalben B. Hapani Daughter-in-law of CH (wife of BH) SH Shri Vithalbhai N. Panelia Bro/in-law of CH & Uncle of BH/DH/NH VNP The family members had several SSI units. The names and their constitution and name of directors/partners/proprietors are as under: SSI UNITS & ITS CONSTITUTION Name Constitution Name of Directors/ Partners/Proprietors M/s. Kich Industries Partnership CH + SH M/s. Kich Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Pvt. Ltd. Co. CH + BH + NH M/s. Kich Manufacturers Proprietary DH M/s. Jay Bajrang Industries Proprietary CH M/s. Fitwell Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Pvt. Ltd. Co. CH + BH + NH M/s. Chaitanya Industries Proprietary NH M/s. Kich Overseas Proprietary BH + NH Closed since 2004 3. There is no dispute about the fact that all the above named business entities have the five persons of Hapani family members mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of valuation rules, appellants have been paying the duty at the price at which KMPL is selling the goods. It is not even the case of the department that KMPL is a related person. Under these circumstances, these findings are not of much help to the Revenue. 4.3 The receipt of raw materials for all the units were looked after by Shri Virghese Philips, clerk of KI. The ld. counsel submitted that in his first statement Shri Virghese Philips had admitted that he received the goods for all units in the premises of KI. However, during cross examination he stated that he was going to respective units to receive the materials. Bills and invoices of suppliers show the address of respective units and also show that the goods have been delivered at respective units. Since all the units were owned by family members only, Shri Virghese Philips was helping all the units at the instance of Shri Chimanbhai Nanjibhai Hapani. We find that even though searches have been conducted in all the units, excess/shortage of raw materials have not been found and there is no clear finding by panchas that the concerned untis did not have machinery for production of the goods which they claim to have produced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here was combined accounting. Each unit has been identified as separate, separate registration certificates have been issued by the department. We find that just because accounting policy is determined and methods followed are same by all the units, clubbing cannot take place. 4.6. The next observation is that stock of raw materials and finished goods of all units lying at a particular time is controlled by KI and KMPL. The observation was countered by the ld. counsel by submitting that no common stock of raw materials or finished goods was controlled by KI. Further each unit is situated at a different place and they are not even adjacent to each other and each has its own accounting of raw material and finished goods and during the visit of officers or during the search operations, no discrepancy was found. KMPL gets the goods manufactured from other units as per their specification and out of their raw materials and no evidence has been shown that other units were doing it for KI. It is natural for KMPL to maintain account of raw material supplied to each unit and finished goods manufactured by each unit. No evidence has been put forth either documentary or by way of findings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05 by KMPL was because KI did not have sufficient balance to pay M/s. Speciality Heaters and this was out of payment due from KMPL to KI and a natural transaction during the course of business. He also submitted the brand name/logo was assigned to KMPL by KI on payment of compensation of Rs.25,000/- and therefore KMPL was the brand owner on the basis of records and this cannot be a ground. As regards one case of transfer of machinery to Fitwell Technology, the ld. counsel submits that the documentary evidence shows that it is an actually a sale. The fact that Kich Overseas paid their insurance premiums as well as insurance premiums of KMPL would not be of any help to the Revenue since Kich Overseas did not undertake any manufacture. 4.13. It was submitted by the ld. A.R. that an amount of Rs.4.3 lakhs was paid to Vijayaben and Shilpaben. This was countered by the ld. counsel that stating that these amount were due to the individuals and were paid and there is no evidence to show that this was a flow back or transfer of money from one unit to the other. He also submitted that for every inter unit transfer of fund, appellants were made only out of outstanding of one unit to the othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
