TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1435
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and parts thereof falling under Chapter 94 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It is claimed that the assessee-Appellants undertook the job work. It is also claimed that the assessee-Appellants are 100% EOU. The assessee-Appellants were enjoying the SSI exemption during the financial year 2003-04 and 2004-05 without obtaining the registration certificate. On the basis of classified information, a search was conducted at the business premises of the assessee-Appellants on 19.11.2005. In the factory, Shri Surya Kant, authorised signatory of the assessee-Appellants, was present. His statement was recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 wherein he inter alia stated that he was working in the capacity of Accountant and was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rnover during the year was not exceeding Rs. 1 crore. The SSI exemption was wrongly denied by the lower authorities. On the second leg of arguments, he submits that the assessee-Appellants are 100% EOU, so their sales were eligible for deduction from the threshold limit of SSI. Another argument of the learned counsel for the assessee-Appellants is pertaining to the wrong invocation of the extended period. According to him, in the instant case, the entire demand is time barred. Lastly, to support his arguments, he relied upon the number of case laws mentioned in his written submissions. 5. On the other hand, Shri R.K. Manjhi, learned DR for the Department, has relied on the impugned order. 6. After hearing both sides at length and on perus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a) the conditions were partly fulfilled and their transactions were found genuine. Therefore, we agree with the finding of the lower authorities that the assessee-Appellants are not entitled for the benefit of 100% EOU. 8. The second leg of argument of the learned counsel for the assessee-Appellants is pertaining to the inclusion of the job work turnover in the threshold limit for SSI exemption. The learned counsel submits that the assessee-Appellants were entrusted the jobs of painting, polishing, erecting false ceiling, erecting partitions, cubicles etc. at sites, which resulted in bringing into existence an immovable property at the site, which is not excisable. According to him, the assessee-Appellants did not include this turnover in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee-Appellants' own taxable sale of the goods. 10. As far as the issue of clandestine clearance is concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee-Appellants submits that there was no instance of clandestine clearance of any finished goods. The parallel invoices, which the Department has solely relied upon, are not the documents used to clandestinely clear the finished goods by them. These were the additional copies of the invoices which had already been raised. It may be on account of the original copy being lost/mis-placed or for any other reason. He also submits that the entire case of the clandestine clearance on the basis of the invoices is not supported by corroborative evidence. The Department has not verified any purchase and re....