2019 (5) TMI 323 - AT - Central Excise

SSI Exemption - use of Brand name of others - whether the aggregate value of clearance of two products viz. catch covers and diaries which were cleared by the Appellant affixing the brand name of others be included in the aggregate value of clearance of all excisable goods during the relevant period so as to determine the eligibility of SSI exemption Notification No.8/2003-CE, dt.01.03.2003, as amended? HELD THAT - The value of catch cover cannot be included in the aggregate value of clearance in computing the aggregate value of clearance to extend the benefit of SSI exemption during the relevant period. The value of aggregate clearance of diaries be included in computing the exemption limit prescribed under Notification No.8/2003-CE, dt.01.03.2003 for the period in question - the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating authority to determine the aggregate value of clearance and re-compute the demand with interest and penalty - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Determining eligibility for SSI exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE for the clearance of 'catch covers' and 'diaries' bearing brand names of others.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Facts of the Case: The appellant, engaged in manufacturing various products under Chapter 48 and 39 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, had cleared certain products bearing brand names of others during a specific period. The Department issued demand notices proposing denial of SSI exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE, leading to a confirmation of demand by the Adjudicating authority and a partial allowance by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. Contentions of the Parties: The appellant argued that 'catch covers' should be considered as packing material eligible for exemption under Notification No.24/2009-CE, citing precedents like Kajal Print & Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Mumbai-V and M/s Beauty Art Vs CCE Mumbai-I. The Revenue contended that diaries cannot be classified as packing material, thus not eligible for exemption.

3. Key Issue: The central issue was whether the value of clearance of 'catch covers' and 'diaries' bearing brand names should be included in the aggregate value to determine eligibility for SSI exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE.

4. Tribunal's Analysis: The Tribunal referred to previous judgments to conclude that 'catch covers' could be considered as packing material and excluded from the aggregate value for exemption calculation. However, it disagreed with the appellant's argument regarding 'diaries,' stating that their value should be included in computing the exemption limit.

5. Decision and Remand: The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the Adjudicating authority to re-calculate the demand by including the value of diaries in the aggregate clearance for determining SSI exemption eligibility under Notification No.8/2003-CE.

This detailed analysis of the judgment outlines the key issues, arguments presented by both parties, the Tribunal's analysis, and the final decision, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal reasoning and outcome of the case.