1993 (3) TMI 238

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nits viz. M/s. Kathiravan Motors and Pumps and M/s. Kathiravan Industries are in fact one and that their clearances have to be clubbed for the purpose of Excise duty. Proceedings were drawn against the respondents and in the show cause notice it was alleged as under : "As the partners are common and from Hindu undivided family for both the units, Land, Building belongs to one of the partners Shri C.A. Arunachalam, the workers of both the units were working at one place, a common generator and power line was in the name of Shri C.A. Arunachalam a conclusion was drawn that both the units are one and the same; and to evade the payment of excise duty another unit was floated. Hence a show cause notice C. No. V/30/15/81/86 CX. ADJ dated 18-12-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the demand in toto as mentioned in the show cause notice and impose penalty or pass such other order as may be deemed fit." 3. The matter was earlier heard and the orders were also reserved. At the time of recording the order it was, however, observed from the narration of the facts in the learned lower authority's order and those contained in the application filed by the Revenue that while the prayer is for demand of duty from M/s. Kathiravan Industries and they have been cited as respondents, the goods in fact appeared to have been manufactured in the premises of M/s. Kathiravan Motors and Pumps and they have not been impleaded in the proceedings before us. The matter was, therefore, reopened & re-heard to give an opportunity to bo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d for the manufacture of electric motors were available only at the premises of M/s. Kathiravan Motors and Pumps and in that view of the matter how it could be said that electric motors were in fact manufactured in the premises of M/s. Kathiravan Industries. He pleaded that M/s. Kathiravan Industries machines were installed at the premises of M/s. Kathiravan Motors and Pumps and the latter was also paying rental charges for the same and it could not be said that M/s. Kathiravan Industries did not own any machinery for the manufacture of the goods in question. 6. We have considered the pleas of both sides. We find the proceedings were drawn asking both the units as to why the clearances of the two should not be clubbed. So far as clubb....