9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Shri S.M. Tata, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Challenge in these appeals at the instance of the assessee is against the order passed by the Commissioner dated 28-2-2002. The issue relates to clubbing of clearances of the two units, namely, M/s. Jindal Electricals and M/s. Jindal Electric & Machinery Corporation for the purpose of eligibility for benefit of SSI exemption. 2. Jindal El ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant notification observed that the exemption shall not be admissible if the clearances by a manufacturer from one or more factories or from a factory by one or more manufacturers had exceeded the specified limit during the preceding financial year. He took the view that Shri B.B. Jindal is the manufacturer in both the units and, therefore, the clearances of both units should be clubbed. 4.&emsp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made applicable to the Central Excise Law. He submits that the question to be considered under the Central Excise Law is whether B.B. Jindal is manufacturer of both the factories. 5. It is accepted legal position and it is not disputed before us that an HUF can hold property and run business. While defining the word 'Manufacture' under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 the word 'm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had investment along with four other shareholders. Both the units were being managed by Rita Dutta. The question that came up for consideration was whether Rita Dutta can be treated as manufacturer of both the units for the purpose of availing SSI benefit. The Tribunal took the view that both the assessees being separate legally understood juridical persons clearances from units held by them canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
