TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (12) TMI 460
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t M/s. Lakme Ltd. (now known as M/s. Trent Ltd.), along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs. In addition, penalty of Rs. l lakh each stand imposed upon other two appellants, who are the employees of M/s. Lakme Ltd. The matter was earlier remanded by the Tribunal vide its order Nos. 304-306/99, dt. 17-3-99, with direction to the Commissioner to examine the agreement entered into by M/s. Lakme Ltd. with other unit for production of talcum powder and to re-decide the matter in the light of the Tribunal's order in case of M/s. Mistair Home Products, wherein identical dispute was involved in respect of M/s. Lakme Ltd. and M/s. Mistair Home Products and Revenue's appeal was rejected. 2. After hearing both sides and after going thro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rces of supplies of various inputs and a technician to 3 units by the name of M/s. Urnee Cosmetics, M/s. Hemali Cosmetics and M/s. Novelty Impex P. Ltd. It stand recorded in the impugned order that M/s. Hemali Cosmetics and M/s. Novelty Impex P. Ltd. were found to be dummy units and the production of M/s. Urnee Cosmetics was being shown as having been manufactured by said units. The above finding does not stand disputed by the learned advocate appearing for the appellant, who submits that in that case, the entire clearance shown by M/s. Hemali Cosmetics and M/s. Novelty Impex P. Ltd. could have been clubbed with the clearance of M/s. Urnee Cosmetics and clearances in excess of small scale exemption could have been charged to duty. However, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there was no financial flow-back. In fact, the Commissioner, in his impugned order, does not dispute that M/s. Urnee Cosmetics had complete machinery to manufacture the goods. He has held M/s. Lakme Ltd. as the manufacturer on the ground that Shri M.A. Affandi, Production Executive of M/s. Lakme Ltd. was having quality control checks in respect of the goods manufactured by M/s. Urnee Cosmetics and Shri N.L. Gore, the Service Executive of M/s. Lakme Ltd., visited the said unit and the talcum powder was being marketed by M/s. Lakme Ltd. at a price which were three times the purchase price. He has also observed that M/s. Urnee Cosmetics was manufacturing the goods on the basis of purchase order received by them from M/s. Lakme Ltd. and only to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating the sale between M/s. Mistair Home Products and M/s. Lakme Ltd. on principal to principal basis, held in favour of the M/s. Lakme Ltd. The said order was impugned by Revenue before Tribunal and Tribunal in the case of CCE v. M/s. Mistair Home Products vide Order No. 466/86-A, dt. 16-6-86 rejected the same. It was held that the transactions between M/s. Mistair Home Products and M/s. Lakme Ltd. were on principal to principal basis and hence acceptable as the basis for assessment of Central Excise duty. Ratio of the law declared, though in respect of assessable value, is fully applicable to the facts of the instant case, inasmuch as an identical agreement stand entered into by M/s. Lakme Ltd. with M/s. Urnee Cosmetics. We do not find an....