TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (11) TMI 1031
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Respondent(s) : 4 ­ 5. MR SP HASURKAR for Respondent(s) : 4 ­ 5. ORAL ORDER 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 7th June 2000 passed by the Respondent no.3 and also to quash the bills issued on the basis of the said order 18th August 2000 towards service Nos. 02312/00076/8 and 02313/1140/9 respectively. 2. The petitioner Unit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icity Board, respondent no.2 had again issued second show cause notice. Which was also replied by the petitioner with clarification regarding the manufacturing details. 4. Respondent no.2 once again visited the petitioner's unit and a show­cause notice was again issued to the petitioner, which was also replied by the petitioner. By letter dated 22.7.2000, the respondent no.2 had asked for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hy;196'c. The said tanker is then directly connected to a displacement pump, which helps it to pass through the Natural Vaporizer and ultimately the end product is procured. 8. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner's unit is governed by the Gas Cylinder Rules, 1981. In the said Rules, the definition of "manufacture" is given as under: "Section 2(xxv) - Manufac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat if a Unit is engaged in the manufacture and/ or production of goods, then it falls under the definition of "Industrial Undertaking". Thus, when the petitioner is registered as a Small Scale Industry and is already paying excise duty, and the said unit can be called as a manufacturing Unit. Hence, the impugned order of the respondent is bad in law and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 11. ....