9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Managing Director of the main appellant against penalty. The main appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Cabin Assemblies and Air Curtains. The dispute in the present case is that the Managing Director of the main appellant is functioning as proprietary concern involved in similar activity and as such the SSI exemption claimed by the main appellant was sought to be denied by combining the turnover of all the three units on the ground that the two partnership concerns were not having real existence and it is the main appellant who should be treated as manufacturer of all items and accordingly SSI exemption limit should be reckoned. 2. In the first proceedings the notice was issued to only to the main appellant and the Manag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence of overreaching financial control of the main appellant for the other two units. No evidence has been produced by the Revenue regarding such financial control and flow back of benefits. All the three units were separately registered under various statutory authorities like Sales Tax, Income Tax etc and even maintenance of separate accounts. These facts are not in dispute. d) The units are involved in manufacture of different items is also not in dispute. Each one had their own department and nobody manufactured and cleared on behalf of the anybody else. 5. The learned AR for Revenue supported the findings of the lower authority. He submitted that the findings and evidences analyzed by the impugned order will show that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, we note even though notices have been issued to all the three units, the impugned order confirmed the quantum of turnover on almost similar set of facts. No further evidence relating to the financial control, flow back has been discussed in these proceedings also. We find that to establish a unit dummy or only existing in paper, sufficient corroborate evidences are to be produced which will mainly relate to financial control, functional independence and manufacture of items which are same and various other facts. In the present case, the evidences available are not leading to such conclusion. Accordingly we find the impugned orders are without merit, the same are set aside and appeals are allowed. (Order Pronounced and Dictated in Open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
