2015 (9) TMI 1493

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... K. Panda, Sr. Adv. , Ms. Shirin Khajuria, Adv., Mr. K. Parameshwar, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv., For  the Respondent :  Mr. S. K. Bagaria, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ramesh Singh, Adv., Mr. Raghu Raman, Adv., Mr. Raghvendra, Adv., Ms. Anna Mathew, Adv., Mr. Kumar Ajit Singh, Adv., Mr. Suman Jyoti Khaitan, Adv. O R D E R The present appeal arises out of five appeals that were filed in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....udgment dated 25.10.2005, but Shri A. K. Panda, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, has confined himself to two of these issues. According to him, the CESTAT has not dealt with whether a subsidiary company, viz., Respondent No. 3 in the present appeal, is only a dummy, consequent to which the excisable goods manufactured by it needs to be clubbed with its holding company, vi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Respondent Nos. 1 and 3, argued before us that the nine factors stated by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise in his order dated 12.10.2004, all of which showed that Respondent No. 3 was, in fact, a dummy of Respondent No. 1, were only trotted out from the Show Cause Notice itself without any discussion of the detailed reply sent by Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 answering all these grounds to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Court, in 'Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Modi Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. [2004 (7) SCC 569] has held that this very circular would have no relevance to notifications other than the Notification mentioned therein. This judgment was followed in 'Parle Bisleri Private Limited v. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Ahmedabad' [2010 (14) SCC 378]. It is clear, ....