LAWS(CE)-2010-1-136

THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. SANTOM ENTERPRISES

Decided On January 29, 2010
The Commissioner of Central Excise Appellant
V/S
Santom Enterprises Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order -in -appeal No. 154/2005(H -III) CE dated 29.8.2005 wide which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order -in -original in challenge before him.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that M/s Santom Enterprises, 24 -110/2, IDA, Uppal, Hyderabad are manufacturers of FRP/PP Storage tanks, FRP/PP lining pipes and FRP roofing sheets falling under Chapter 39. Officers of Central Excise Department visited the appellants unit and found that there was another unit by name of Santom Industrial Liners (SIL) belonging to the same proprietor Sri M.V. Francis operating in the same premises. They have used same workers and exchanged orders from one firm to another. Funds were also transferred in similar manner. They were maintaining parallel set of invoices. Their turnover exceeded Rs. 30 lakhs every year from 93 -94 onwards. Santom Enterprises had transferred Rs. 3,00,000/ -to Santom Industrial Liners on 27.11.97. Sri M. Francis in his statement inter alia stated that they have supplied goods worth Rs. 30 lakhs every year from 93 -94 onwards as he was under impression that FRP/PP Storage tanks, FRP/PP lining pipes and FRP roofing sheets are fully exempted as they were not availing modvat facilities; that as soon as they crossed Rs. 30 lakhs excluding FRP/PP Tanks during 97 -98, they voluntarily registered with Central Excise Department.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the entire issue is time barred though he may argue on merits. It is the submission that the period involved in this case is between 1993 -1994 to 1994 -1995 and again from 1996 -1998 and show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 11.1.1999. It is his submission that whether the items manufactured i.e. FRP/PP storage tanks etc., are classifiable under chapter Heading 3926.90 was decided by various case laws during the period few of them are sited below: