TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (2) TMI 709
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are as follows:- The departmental officers received intelligence that M/s. Shanti Auto Pvt. Ltd. (SAPL for short) are evading Central Excise duty by irregular availment of exemption under Notification No. 162/86-C.E. dated 1-3-86 in terms of the exemption notification. The Auto Rickshaws manufactured by a unit are entitled for concessional rate of duty under the above-mentioned exemption notification provided they are manufactured out of duty paid chassis on which no modvat credit has been taken. Another unit M/s. Vikas Auto was functioning in the same premises. M/s. Shanti Auto cleared auto rickshaws on concessional rate of duty. Their stand is that they purchased duty paid chassis from M/s. Vikas Auto. The exemption Notification is no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; M/s. Vikas Auto and M/s. Shanti Auto cannot be considered as belonging to the same person. (3) During the period from 23-9-93 to 2-9-94 M/s. Shanti Auto Pvt. Ltd. have cleared 64 auto rickshaws without payment of duty. The net duty payable is Rs. 6,09,375/-. In view of the above findings, the Commissioner demanded the central excise duty of Rs. 6,09,375/- under Rule 9(2) read with proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, a penalty of Rs. 60,000/- has been imposed on M/s. Shanti Auto Pvt. Ltd., under Rule 173G read with Rules 9(2), 52A and 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944, Penalty of Rs. 6,000/- was imposed on Shri V.C. Nahata under Rule 209A for his involvements. The auto ri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch as both the concerns were proprietary concerns during the material period and they have interest in the business of each other for being father and son. (h) Further, Vikas Auto do not have the manufacturing facilities as stated above. Even if there was financial flow back, it need not be shown from one unit to another unit. In the present case where the money is kept is irrelevant because both the persons are related persons. Whether the money remained with father or son does not make difference. In view of the above grounds, Revenue feels that the benefit of Notification No. 162/86 is not admissible to SAPL and the entire duty should be demanded. 5Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, learned SDR appeared for the R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been brought out on record in this aspect. Under these circumstances, the Commissioner's order cannot be assailed. There are no strong grounds to uphold the Revenue's contentions. We have no other option to dismiss Revenue's appeals. Appeal No. E/211/98 of M/s. SAPL : 7M/s. Shanti Auto Pvt Ltd., are aggrieved over the adjudication order demanding duty on clearance of 64 autos. The learned consultant forcefully argued that the chassis procured from M/s. Twin Cities are deemed to be duty paid. 8On going through the order, we find that the Commissioner has given a very clear finding that these 64 auto rickshaws have been cleared without payment of appropriate duty. M/s. SAPL contended that they had procured the chassis for the ab....