2023 (1) TMI 1139 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal upholds decision on clubbing clearance value with dummy firms. Revenue's appeal rejected.

C.C.E. & S.T. -RAJKOT Versus KICH INDUSTRIES

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding the clubbing of clearance value of ... SSI Exemption - dummy companies/firms or not - clubbing of clearances - HELD THAT:- For the earlier period after detailed investigation and relying of various evidences, the adjudicating authority had confirmed the demand clubbing the clearance value of all other alleged dummy firms/ companies in the clearance value of the respondent. The same was challenged before this Tribunal, this Tribunal vide judgment reported at M/S. KICH INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS VERSUS CCE RAJKOT [2013 (9) TMI 650 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] allowed the appeal of the respondent. In the present case, no fresh investigation has been carried out, only the earlier proceeding of the aforesaid case has been followed. The Tribunal’s decision has been upheld by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in COMMISSIONER VERSUS KICH INDUSTRIES [2013 (10) TMI 1251 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Issues:Whether the clearance value of various dummy firms/companies should be clubbed with the clearance value of the respondent.Analysis:The case revolved around the issue of whether the clearance value of dummy firms/companies should be clubbed with the clearance value of the respondent. The department alleged that the appellant had floated dummy firms/companies, and the value of these entities should be clubbed in the clearance value of the respondent. However, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the demand based on a previous Tribunal judgment in the appellant's case, where it was held that all units are separate and their clearance value cannot be clubbed. The Revenue filed an appeal against this decision for the subsequent period.During the proceedings, the Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterated the grounds of appeal, while the Counsel for the respondent argued that there were no new facts or changes in circumstances from the earlier judgment, making the Revenue's appeal unsustainable. The Counsel pointed out that the Tribunal's decision had been upheld by the Gujarat High Court in a previous case involving the same parties.Upon careful consideration of the submissions and records, the Tribunal found that the issue at hand was whether the various firms and companies were dummy entities of the respondent, warranting the clubbing of their clearance value. It was noted that no fresh investigation had been conducted in the present case, and the earlier proceedings were followed. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) based on the previous judgment in the respondent's case, which had also been upheld by the Gujarat High Court. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the issue was no longer res-integra, and there was no infirmity in the impugned order. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.Additionally, the respondent filed a Cross Objection, and the same was allowed, leading to the disposal of the Cross Objection along with the COD.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) based on the previous judgments and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, thereby settling the issue of clubbing the clearance value of dummy firms/companies with the respondent's clearance value.