2013 (12) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....epresentative (DR) For the Respondent: Shri K.K. Anand, Advocate JUDGEMENT Per. D.N. Panda :- Revenue is in appeal being aggrieved by the appellate order passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the adjudication who had held that the value of clearances of Suchita Steels, Chandigarh, Suchita Steels, Mohali and M/s Stelco Engineers, Mohali are to be clubbed to grant option....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....neers, Mohali was a proprietorship of Ms. Bindu Garg wife of late Shri Avdesh Garg. He equally found that the M/s Suchita Steels of Chandigarh was a HUF concern where late Shri Avdesh Garg was a Karta. Suchita Steels, Chandigarh was formed in the year 1992 and Suchita Steels, Mohali was formed in 1998 while Suchita Steels, Mohali was existing from 1992. Therefore, no clubbing of clearances of Such....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....control, clubbing proposal was made in the show cause notice and that was confirmed in adjudication. 4. When the respondent was aggrieved by the adjudication order it came to learned Commissioner (Appeals) who categorically noticed that apart from the related persons being owner in the above three business concerns, there was no financial flowback of fund from two Mohali units to Chandigarh uni....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g was absent. 7. Heard both sides and perused the records. 8. When department recognise Suchita Steels was a different concern formed from the year 1992 it was not brought out that the fund of HUF was invested either in Suchita Steels, Mohali from 1992 or Suchita Steels, Mohali from 1998. Therefore, there was absence of investment by the Karta therein on behalf of the HUF. That brought out d....