9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of clearances of two units it has to be held that one unit is principal unit and other is a dummy unit floated with a view to camouflage the other. In such circumstances demands can only be confirmed against the principal unit - matter is remanded to the Commissioner to decide afresh - appeal allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .Plasto Flex Industries, the payment was made by either Miko Enterprises or by Urvish Plastics depending on availability of funds. In other two companies also the situation was similar. It was alleged that the same was happening because all three firms were family concerned and looked after by same members. The Modvat Credit of all purchases was taken by Plasto Flex Industries irrespective of the fact that whether payment has been made by Plasto Flex Industries or other companies. Some part of the inputs purchased on account of Plasto Flex Industries were diverted to Miko Enterprises without raising any invoices and without receiving any consideration. On such inputs sent by Plasto Flex Industries to Miko Enterprises, the credit was not rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal vide its order dated 15/03/2005 remanded the matter back to the Commissioner to decide in the light of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Modi Alkalies 2004 (171) ELT 155 (SC). The Tribunal also directed that clubbing case is to be decided without adding the turnover of Urvish Plastics being a trading concern. The matter was again adjudicated along with some other show-cause notices issued latter. Aggrieved by the said order, revenue, Plosto Flex Industries, Jayant Parikh and Nilesh Parikh are in appeal before the Tribunal. 2. Learned Counsel for Shri Nilesh B Parikh, Shri Jayant C Parikh and M/s.Plasto Flex Industries argued that Plasto Flex Industries was established as a partnership firm in 1965. They were regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was only a trading unit. Tribunal simultaneously directed the Commissioner to re-determine the clubbing in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Modi Alkalies (supra). In the meanwhile nine show-cause notices were issued only to Miko Enterprises covering the period April 1996 to December 1999 and eight show-cause notices were issued to only to Urvish Plastics. Three show-cause notices were issued to Plasto Flex Industries for the period April 1998 to March 2000. Five show-cause notices were issued to Urvish Plastics and Plasto Flex Industries were dropped by the Deputy Commissioner. However, Revenue challenged the same before the Commissioner (Appeals) who partly allowed the Revenue s appeal. The matter was agit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the other or financial flowback between the units. To support his submission he relied on the following case laws: a) Superior Products 2008 (230) ELT 3 (SC) b) Renu Tandon - 1993 (66) ELT 375 (Raj) c) Jagjivandas & Co. - 1985 (19) ELT 441 (T) d) Bhagwan Das Kanodia - 1987 (32) ELT 204 (T) e) Techno Device 0 2009 (243) ELT 79 (T) f) Kinjal Electricals - 1989 (43) ELT 327 (T) He asserted that as the only ground for reaching the conclusion that there is a pervasive financial and management control, the impugned order relies on the fact that Plasto Flex Industries supplied raw materials to Miko Enterprises but retain credit in respect thereof to themselves and on the seizure of 625 Kgs of Plastics profiles from the premises of Pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the firms the payments were received from any of the firm. He further argued that the Commissioner has observed in para 25 of the impugned order that all the show-cause notices issued during the subject period are to be dropped but there are no findings recording the parties and demands in respective of which the same were dropped. Revenue has also raised the same issue as the other appellants that the Commissioner has failed to identify the person against whom the demand has been confirmed. Learned AR also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parle Bisleri Pvt. Ltd. 2011 (263) ELT 15 (SC) to assert that in such cases corporate veil needs to be lifted. Learned AR also relies on the decision of Modi Alkalies (sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
