LAXMI IMPEX Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAJKOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals are being disposed off by a common order as they are against the same impugned order passed by Commissioner vide which he has confirmed duty against M/s. Laxmi Impex along with imposition of penalty and has imposed penalties upon the other appellants. We have heard both the sides duly represented by Sh. S.S. Sekhon, Adv., Sh. R.V. Shetty, Adv., Sh. Vipin Jain, Adv., Sh. Vishal Agarwal, C.A. for the parties and Shri Sameer Chitkara, SDR for the Revenue.

(2.) AS per facts on record, M/s. Laxmi Impex is an 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of suiting, shirting, dress materials and sarees in terms of the LOP granted by the Jt. Development Commissioner, Kandla Free Trade Zone, Kandla. Their factory was visited by the officers of Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) on 10 -5 -2002, who conducted various checks and verifications. It was noticed that the said appellant was de -bonded on 10 -4 -2002 and was no longer enjoying the status of a 100% EOU. During the course of search, records maintained by the said unit during the ordinary course of their business as also some other documents pertaining to M/s. Shree Shyam Syntex and M/s. United Enterprises were also recovered. Statements of various persons were recorded and further investigations were made, on the basis of which show cause notice was issued alleging that the two proprietary firms i.e. M/s. Shree Shyam Syntex and M/s. United Enterprises, who have procured the yarn from the open market and sold the grey fabrics, were actually dummy units owned by M/s. Laxmi Impex and all the manufacturing activities were being undertaken by M/s. Laxmi Impex. It was further alleged that the said units have manufactured grey fabric on job work from duty paid yarn received from 14 different units whereas carrying out of job work was not permissible to a 100% EOU. Accordingly, the notice proposed the confirmation of demand and imposition of penalties. The said notice stands culminated into the order passed by Commissioner, which is under challenge before Tribunal.

(3.) AFTER appreciating the statements made by both the sides, we find that issues required to be decided, as framed by Commissioner, are as under : -