Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Ramesh Nair, Member (J) and Raju

ORDER

Ramesh Nair, Member (J)

1. The appellant M/s. Bijal Packaging and M/s. B.B. containers both are situated at one factory premises at Plot No. 227/C, Dantali Industrial Estate, Gota-Vadsar Road, Dantali, Tal.-Kalol, Dist. Gandhi Nagar, were engaged in the manufacture of metal tin container falling under Chapter Heading No. 7310 2110 of First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were manufacturing Metal Steel Container on their own as well as on job work basis and splitting up the clearances availing the exemption from payment of central excise duty under Notification No. 08/2003-CE : MANU/EXCT/0060/2003 dated 01.03.2003 as amended. On a search and further investigation, it was found that the assessees were engaged in manufacture of metal tin container without obtaining central excise registration. For manufacture of tin container. One another unit M/s. Shriji Packaging which is also located in the same premise, purchased tin plates from manufacturer like SAIL and sold the same on resale basis to the owner of oil mills. These oil mills owners than sent the tin plates for converting into metal tin container on job work basis to M/s. Bijal Packaging and M/s. B.B. Containers. On inquiry it was found that the edible oil manufacturer for whom the metal tin container were manufactured on job work basis revealed that metal tin container purchased from the said unit used to have their logo and name duly embossed; that till edible oil was dutiable, they used to avail job work procedure; that in some cases they out rightly purchased metal tin container from the unit and that the same were not job work; that in some cases the metal tin plates were transferred to the said unit for conversion into container on job work basis, that in some cases they showed purchase of tin plates from M/s. Shriji Packaging and then transferred it to M/s. Bijal Packaging for conversion into container. After detailed investigation, SCN was issued to the appellants which culminated into adjudication order whereby the demand of central excise duty, interest and imposition of penalty were confirmed, therefore, the present appeals.

2. Sh. S.J. Vyas Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as regard clubbing of sales turnover of all the units in a financial year, the appellant do not contest the said clubbing. He fairly concedes that as per Notification No. 08/2003-CE : MANU/EXCT/0060/2003, the clearances by one or more manufacturer from one factory, the exemption shall apply to the total value of clearance of all the manufacturer manufactured the goods in a factory shall be considered for the aggregated value. Therefore, he do not contest the demand on the ground of eligibility of SSI exemption Notification No. 08/2003-CE. : MANU/EXCT/0060/2003 He further submits that as regard the demand of duty on job work basis, the adjudicating authority has considered the value as per M/s. Ujagar Prints case i.e. raw material cost + job charges. He submits that the same goods were sold by the appellant to various buyers, therefore, the sale price of the same goods was available, in such case as per the judgment of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ispat Industries 2007 (2) TMI (5) (Tri.LB), when the sale price of same goods is available which is manufactured on job work basis, the sale price will apply instead of the value adopted in........