2008 (9) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in Appeal No.- E/369/96-C whereby the Respondent was held eligible to avail of the benefit of the small scale exemption notification. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: The Respondent M/s. Surcoat Paints Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the manufacture of paints and varnishes falling under Chapter 32 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Respondent was incorporated as a private limited company on 13th October, 1986 under the Companies Act. Respondent is a registered small scale industry holding permanent registration certificate issued by the General Manager, District Industries, Centre of Director of Industries, U.P. Respondent has been availing exemption of S.S.I., as envisaged under Notification No. 175/86, date....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....25th January, 1995 as it had wrongly availed the benefit under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. and 1/93-CE. by willfully suppressing the facts to avail small scale industry exemption violating the Provisions of Rule 173B, 173F and 173G read with Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. As per show cause notice the SSI benefit is not available to the respondents on the ground that SSI registration certificate was not correctly given to the respondent. According to the Revenue, the Respondents were not entitled to the exemption granted to the small scale industry unit, under Notification No. 175/86-CE and 1/93-C.E. as the aggregate value of excisable goods effected by Surcoat and Singhal taken together exceeded Rs.150 lakhs/200 lakhs and hen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....normally the extent of investment on plant and machinery, the limit of which was earlier Rs.35 lakhs prior to 1-4-91and thereafter, it was raised to Rs.60 lakhs. But this is required to be gone into by the competent authority before issuing the SSI certificate to a particular unit. In this case, there is nothing on record to suggest that the Directorate of Industries, Government of Utter Pradesh even raised any objection about the non-compliance of this norm by the respondents before issuing the SSI certificate. Rather it can be safely inferred that this norm was complied with, by the respondents and they are accordingly issued the SSI certificate, especially when there is no material on record to raise any inference that they suppressed th....