9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring 2007-08 and 2008-09 M/s. Rupal Drugs Ltd. was doing their job work and not involved in manufacturing activity of their own. In support of same, he has produced the ER-1 return of the said period which he claimed to have produced before the lower authorities who did not notice on the same, but instead relied on the letter dated 17.02.2010 which was not related to M/s. Rupal Drugs Ltd. - there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Rupal Drugs Ltd. was registered as a manufacturer and although they had dropped the manufacturing activity for themselves from April 2007 onwards and were operating as job worker for the appellants. He pointed out that the registration of the said unit with Central excise continued and the appellant continued to file nil returns. He pointed out that while the show-cause notice sought to deny ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scontinuing their own production and leasing the factory to the appellant. However, from para4 Reconciliation of sales value for the year 2008-09 shown in copy of letter dated 17.02.2010 issued by appellant addressing the Audit, Thane II as per ER.1 total clearance value of goods for local and export is shown as ₹ 31,28,76,513/- . 3. Ld. Counsel argued that the said statement is wrong ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir job work and not involved in manufacturing activity of their own. In support of same, he has produced the ER-1 return of the said period which he claimed to have produced before the lower authorities who did not notice on the same, but instead relied on the letter dated 17.02.2010 which was not related to M/s. Rupal Drugs Ltd. It is obvious that the sole reason for denial is that M/s. Rupal D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
