2005 (10) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3-CE., dated 31-7-2003 dropping the demands confirmed by the Additional Commissioner denying the benefit of Notification No. 08/2001, dated 1-3-2001. The grounds for denying the benefit of SSI Notification was that the respondent had become a Joint Venture with only 26% stake by the Government of India and 74% holdings by M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HLL in short). The Revenue contended that since M....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by itself will not make both the units as one and the same. He also, after examination, held that there is no financial flow back from M/s. Modem Food Industries Ltd. to M/s. HLL except any amount that M/s. HLL may receive by way of dividend. He has noted that receipt of dividend cannot, per se, be termed as flow back to the holding company. He has also noted that the respondent is not a sham or ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... hearing of both sides, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The Commissioner (Appeals) has noted all the factors which are relevant for deciding the issue. The respondent is an independent, registered unit having their own brand name. Merely because M/s. HLL held some shares that by itself cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of Notification in terms of the judgments noted in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion No. 8/2001 in para (v) lays down that - "where a manufacturer clears the specified goods from one or more factories, the exemption in his case shall apply to the correct value of clearance mentioned against each of the serial numbers in the said Table and not separately for each manufacturer." 4. On the basis of this Notification, both the units viz. M/s. HLL and the respondent are inde....