2017 (10) TMI 116

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant None for the respondent ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa:           Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the Revenue filed an appeal. The respondents are not present and the Revenue was given a number of opportunities to serve the notice upon the respondents. As per latest communication of  the respondents' jurisdictional Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Accordingly, the proceedings were initiated against them resulting in confirmation of demand of duty and imposition of penalty.  On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 4.  For better appreciation of the reasoning adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order, we reproduce the relevant para 9 and 10: "9.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that in the show cause notice and the adjudicating authority has recorded the fact that in Order-in-Original.  There are no hidden or otherwise flow of funds between them to make inferences that they constitute one unit and in that position clubbing of clearances will not be justified.  Both the Appellant units have been filing separate returns periodically and have submitted that their ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... records/papers of M/s.Sankla Industries under section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is set aside and penalty of Rs. 20 lakhs levied on the firm on this account is dropped.  Similarly there are not sufficient evidence to establish that Shri Bharat Bhushan Sankla & Shri Sandeep Sankla have violated the provisions of Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and penalty of Rs. 5 lakh imp....