2008 (12) TMI 127 - AT - Central Excise

Issue of using brand name of foreign collaborator controversy settled by LB in the case of M/s. Namtech Systems Ltd. against the appellant in impugned case for period prior to settlement of controversy, there was no malafide on part of appellant of using foreign collaborator s name, so entitled to benefit of SSI exemption demand on ground appellant they have supplied pumps for handling chemicals to their customers, under the guise of pumps for handling water matter remanded in this context for verification of comparative chart produced by appellant showing the total clearance and for re-quantification of the demand

Summary

Issues:
1. Use of foreign collaborator's name on pumps affecting small scale exemption.
2. Supplying pumps for handling chemicals under the guise of water pumps.

Analysis:
1. Issue 1 - Use of foreign collaborator's name:
The appellant faced a demand due to using the foreign collaborator's name on pumps, challenging their small scale exemption eligibility. The Tribunal found the demand for using the brand name was time-barred. Despite contradictory decisions, the appellant's belief in exemption due to brand name use was accepted. Citing the Namtech Systems Ltd. case, the Tribunal set aside the demand on limitation grounds.

2. Issue 2 - Supplying pumps for handling chemicals:
Another part of the demand was based on the Revenue's investigation revealing customers ordered chemical handling pumps but were invoiced for water pumps. The appellant argued they manufactured water pumps, and customer usage did not change the pumps' nature. The Revenue presented buyer statements indicating chemical pump clearances as water pumps. The Tribunal upheld the demand only where evidence specified chemical pump clearances, remanding unverified cases for re-quantification. The matter was referred back to the adjudicating authority for further verification and quantification, considering appellant's discounts and cum-duty pricing.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the demand related to the brand name issue and remanded the clandestine clearance demand for re-quantification. The adjudicating authority was instructed to consider discounts and cum-duty pricing. Both appeals were disposed of accordingly on 17-12-2008.