9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he other three appellants are its partners. The main appellants are engaged in printing of sheet, labels, wrappers etc. in their premises at Patparganj, Delhi. They had another premises at Rohtas Nagar, Delhi where they were manufacturing printed duplex cartons and lamination of sheets etc. The case against the main appellant is that they have evaded Central Excise duty by creating/utilizing dummy units in different names to show split up turnover in order to avail SSI exemption for excisable goods. The show cause notice alleged that four concerns viz. : M/s Neha International, M/s Sandeep Trading Company, M/s Kaveri Udyog and M/s K.S. Graphics alongwith other two units M/s Vrinda Fine Arts, M/s Shiva Graphics were so connected with main ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k basis; the proprietor of M/s Sandeep Trading Work is a full time Manager with the main appellant and the Management of both these units is common; M/s K.S. Graphics were manufacturing cartons and boxes and since word packaging was indicating in their operation the same should be included in the overall manufacturing and clearance of main appellant. 3. We note that the impugned order used the words dummy units and extended armed units without categorical examination of scope of these terms. The interconnection by way of relationship of the proprietors or by other means among these units and also with the main appellant appears to be the main basis for the conclusion arrived at by the Original Authority. We find much more categorical evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s connection, reference can be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in CCE, Chennai vs. Urbane Industries reported in 2015 (325) E.L.T. 726 (Mad.) and decision of the Tribunal in Ramsay Pharma (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Allahabad reported in 2001 (127) E.L.T. 789 (Tri. Del.). 5. We find that on this issue, in view of the clear violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned order cannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, the same is set aside. However, the Original Authority is free to re-decide the issue after following the principles of natural justice and affording opportunity to all the units and persons impugned in the original proceedings. The appeals are allowed with the above observations. ( Order pronounced in op ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
