2017 (4) TMI 497

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant Shri.N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) for respondent ORDER Per Ramesh Nair 1. The fact of the case is that the appellant is a unit of National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Ltd. (NTC) and they are engaged in the manufacture of dyed/printed cotton fabrics falling under Chapter 55 of the CETA, 1985. The appellant cleared the manufactured goods to the Central Distribution Centr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tribution centre of the appellant themselves. Therefore, there is no question of related person between the appellant and their own CDC, therefore, the entire demand based on the ground that the CDC is a related person of the appellant is incorrect. Therefore, the show-cause notice which is based on the wrong foundation, the entire proceedings will not survive. Hence, the demand is liable to be se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ropack 2016 (338) ELT 162 (SC) e) Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd. 2012 (282) ELT 547 (Tri-Del) 3. On the other hand, Shri. N. N. Prabhudesai, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings in the impugned order. He further submits that the CDC falls under the category of interconnected undertaking as provided under the definition of related persons in Se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../s. National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Ltd. and the appellant is a unit of said company. Therefore, all the three i.e., National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Ltd., the appellant and CDC, are under one single entity, i.e. the company, M/s. National Textiles Corporation (Maharashtra North) Ltd. Therefore, among three there are no different persons involved. Accordingly, ther....