2009 (8) TMI 522

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hread, falling under Chapter 40 of the Schedule to CETA, 1985. During the relevant period, they were working under small scale exemption Notification No. 7/97-C.E., dated 1-3-97. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 9-2-98, who conducted various checks and verifications. As a result, stock of latex rubber to the extent of Rs.1288.500 kgs. was found in excess than the recorded balance and 500 kgs. was found in semi-finished condition. The officers also recovered private records like bill books, miscellaneous registers and declarations etc. filed by the said appellant. The records pertaining to another unit under the name and style of M/s. Shree Ambica Rubber Company, which was located a few plots away from the appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mitted that no manufacturing activity was being carried out in the said premises for a long time. 6. During further investigation, it was found that M/s. Shree Rubber Works and M/s. Shree Ambica Rubber Co. and M/s. Shree Bhagwati Trading Co. were having their offices situated in one building. The said offices were put to search on 9-2-98. It was found that both the manufacturing units were sending their finished goods under their respective sale bills to their Daman office from where it was being sold by their trading concern M/s. Shree Bhagwati Trading Co. under the cover of their own sales bills. 7. During the course of further investigations, statements of various persons were recorded wherein the deponents admitted that M/s. Shree....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on M/s. Shree Ambica Rubber Co. under Rule 209A of CER, 1944. Further, penalty of Rs.10,000/- each has been imposed on Shri Sanjay R. Shah and Shri Deepak R. Shah under Rule 209A of CER, 1944. Appeal against the above order did not succeed before Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. 9. We have heard Shri P.V. Sheth, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri J.S. Negi, learned SDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Learned advocate has drawn our attention to various decisions of the Tribunal laying down that common partner in the two offices or having common office etc., cannot be made ground for clubbing the clearances of the two units. However, we find that the ratio of the above units is not applicab....