TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 789
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;). 2. It would be necessary to refer to some basic facts for appreciating the controversy raised in this Tax Appeal as under. 2.1 M/s. Suman Plywood Private Limited, appellant herein, is a company engaged in manufacture of plywood, block board etc. on its own account and on job work basis. According to the appellant, the plywood manufactured on job work basis was being used in a semi finished condition. 2.2 M/s. Krishna Industries is an unregistered unit allegedly a dummy firm created by the appellant herein, to evade the payment of duty. 2.3 A team of Central Excise Officials visited the factory premises of the appellant on 08.03.2003 in presence of panchas and seized some of the record under panchnama. M/s. Krishna Industries....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal of the revenue by quashing and setting aside the order of Commissioner (A) vide its impugned order. 3. Resultantly, the present Appeal by the appellant, raising following substantial questions of law for our consideration: "i. Can the Tribunal consider issues which were not a part of show cause notice and never considered by the original authority, to hold against the appellant by giving a totally new finding? ii. In the present case, is the finding of the Tribunal not against evidence on record establishing that M/s. Krishna Industries, the raw material supplier had undertaken further activity on semi finished plywood supplied to it by the appellantjob worker? iii. Can demand of Central Excise duty be confirmed on a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n lease by M/s. Krishna Industries. According to the learned counsel, the activity of finishing semi finished plywood by cutting the same after receiving from the job workers and after which manually the core gaps were filled, followed by polishing with sanding machine & all these activities were undertaken by M/s. Krishna Industries. Only after this process, plywood becomes a commodity in marketable condition. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-department contended that no interference is desirable in as much as all necessary aspects are duly regarded by the Tribunal. 6. On having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on having examined at length the orders of the adjudicating authority & voluminous documents produced on rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ement, a show-cause-notice was issued to the present appellant. The authority was of the opinion that M/s. Krishna Industries had no facility to manufacture the plywood and it is only to ensure that total value of clearance of the appellant remains within the limit for availing the benefit of SSI exemption, that such mechanism was arranged creating existence of M/s. Krishna Industries. e) It is a matter of record that the order-in-original was passed in favour of the Revenue whereas, the Commissioner (Appeals-III) held in favour of the present appellant, however, the Tribunal, by a detailed order, quashed and set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). f) It is to be noted that on the strength of show-cause-notice & material ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th Narendra Jha. One Vijaykumar Dokania, Director of SPPL was supervising activities of this dummy firm. These details coupled with all other circumstances established on record led the Adjudicating authority to conclude against the present appellant in order in original. g) All those conclusions convinced the Tribunal to uphold such order. What further weighed with the Tribunal was that the machineries, which were also examined in the presence of panch-witnesses, were not found in working condition. There was nothing to indicate that the labourers were engaged in carrying out the job work. It was a claim of one of the partners that directly from Suman Plywood Pvt. Ltd., the finished goods were being sent. The benefit of SSI exemption wa....