9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y belonging to or maintained by the Central Government or by a State Government, or by a State Industries Corporation, or by a State Small Industries Corporation or by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission, then the value of the excisable goods cleared from such factory alone shall be taken into account. - Since the respondent unit, is a unit owned and by the controlled Government of Rajasthan, and this fact is not disputed in the grounds of appeal. In our view, all the clearances of the respondent’s unit cannot be clubbed for the purpose of SSI exemption with the clearances of SPAF, Jaipur. Therefore, is no infirmity in the impugned order. - Decided against Revenue. - E/2164/2005-EX(DB) - Final Order No. A/53498/2014-EX(DB) - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Joint Commissioner vide Order-in-Original, dated 31-12-2001 by which the above-mentioned duty demand was confirmed against the respondent and besides this, penalty of equal amount was imposed under Section 11AC. On appeal being filed to the Commissioners (Appeals) against the order of the Joint Commissioner, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal, dated 4-4-2005 set aside the Joint Commissioner s order and allowed the appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the certificate of Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan certifying that the RAJFED is an Apex Marketing Federation belonging to the Rajasthan State Government and is also maintained by the Government of Rajasthan and besides this, he also observed that Hon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not a factory owned or maintained by the State Government. 4. Mrs. Sukriti Das, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the appellant defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner in it and cited the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, reported in 2009 (234) E.L.T. 413 (Mad.) and pleaded that in view of this judgment, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. She also emphasized that the respondent unit is a unit owned and controlled by the State Government of Rajasthan and hence, the provisions of para 5(E) of the notification No. 9/2003-C.E., are applicable and the clearances of the respondent s unit cannot be clubbed with the clearances of its sister unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
