9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at there is a possibility of the said manufacturer catering to the needs of other similar purchasers holding different brand names cannot be ruled out. The Revenue has not brought on record as to the role of the appellant in the non-payment of Excise Duty by the said manufacturer; the appellant has pleaded that it was only procuring the said AVS and the only relationship that existed was that of manufacturer and purchaser and nothing more than that, which is not disputed by the Revenue. Even the fact that the said manufacturer was enjoying the exemption being the SSI unit, has also been claimed by the appellant as being unaware of, which is also not denied by the Revenue. The granting of exemption for SSI unit is based on certain crit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2; it also appeared to the Revenue that the above activity of manufacturing by the said M/s. St. Roch Enterprises and clearance through the trading company M/s. St. Roch Electricals was after crossing the SSI exemption limit during the year 2010-11 and hence, a Show Cause Notice dated 17.07.2013 was issued to M/s. St. Roch Enterprises. 2.2 The appellant before this Bench was also called upon to Show Cause as to why penalty under Section 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 shall not be imposed on them since they were the other party who had received the non-duty paid goods from the said M/s. St. Roch Enterprises. 3. It appears that both the co-noticees filed their respective replies separately. The appellant namely, M/s. Voltas Ltd., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant had outsourced the manufacture of AVS, for which the said manufacturer was to affix the brand name of V-Service , it is also a fact borne on the record that the said manufacturer was marketing the stabilizers manufactured by it under its own name Info Power . That there is a possibility of the said manufacturer catering to the needs of other similar purchasers holding different brand names cannot be ruled out. 9.1 Be that as it may, the Revenue has not brought on record as to the role of the appellant in the non-payment of Excise Duty by the said manufacturer; the appellant has pleaded that it was only procuring the said AVS and the only relationship that existed was that of manufacturer and purchaser and nothing more t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
