9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... V.K. Agrawal These are three appeals filed by M/s. Raja Valve Industries against the order passed by the Collector (Appeals), disallowing them the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 and demanding the duty of excise. 2. Shri Vinod Aggarwal, ld. Advocate, submitted that M/s. Inderjit Co., comprising of two partners, namely, Smt. Paramjit Kaur and Shri Inderjit Singh, was register ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f change in the name as the effective date for the purpose of allowing them the benefit of Notification 175/86. He submitted that the change in the name of the partnership concern does not affect the status of the factory as S.S.I. unit. According to paragraph 4 of the notification, the exemption is applicable only to a factory, which is an undertaking registered with the Director of Industries in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... change of name in the S.S.I. certificate due to procedural formalities, does not make notification not available. He also relied upon the decision in the case of C.C.E. Vs. Kanara Fire Works Industries reported in 1995 (10) RLT 60 - 1995 (78) E.L.T. 477 (Tribunal). 3. Countering the arguments, Shri Jagdish Singh, ld. D.R., submitted that S.S.I. unit is not a transferable document and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jalandhar in 1986. On retirement of one of the partners, the partnership concern ceased to exist and after a lapse of some period, new partnership concern was formed by Smt. Paramjit Kaur with her daughter and on an application made by them, the name of the new partnership concern was changed in the S.S.I. Certificate. It is also not in dispute that the present appellant has continued the factory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
