9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were not having Central Excise Registration and claiming SSI Exemption specified under Notification No. 8/2000-CE & 8/2001-CE. The appellants used to clear goods on transfer voucher & Subsequently issue commercial invoice after acceptance of goods. The goods were liable to duty on MRP basis under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Notification No. 9/2000-CE (NT) dated 01.03.2000 & 5/2001-CE(NT) dated 01.03.2001 whereby 40% abatement allowed under sub-heading 2108.99. The sole ground for the impugned proceedings is that the appellant has suppressed their production and cleared the same on the invoices of M/s Tara Fitness Product (in short TFP) & M/s Hastir Fitness Product (in short HFP) to keep their sale within exemption lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nceived and incorrect. It is submits that the value of sale of M/s TFP during the year 2000-01 & 2001-02 were Rs. 21,34,507/- & Rs. 19,83,113/- respectively;. The alleged value of clearances on M/s TFP invoices and consignment note during the period 2000-2001 were Rs. 7,87,734/- and during the period 01.04.2001 to 25.09.2001 were Rs. 5,17,698/-. It further substantiate that M/s TFP was working and their turnover is far in excess than alleged value shown in Annexure-D in the show cause notice in respect M/s TFP. He further submits that appellate authority failed to appreciate that for manufacture of goods by M/s TFP & M/s HFP only small mixture and trays were required, as goods after mixing were packed and marketed. He further submits that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be manufactured by appellant and cleared on invoices of TFP and HFP. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 5. On the other hand, the ld. AR reiterated the finding in the impugned order and further submits that during the course of examination such various incriminating documents were recovered and presumed under panchnama and these records have never been denied by the appellants and the cross verification of statutory records revealed that many entries did not tally, therefore, the impugned orders is to be confirmed. 6. On careful consideration of submissions made by both the sides, the facts of the case are not in dispute. Initially the appellant are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
