2000 (6) TMI 650

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)]. - This is an application for waiver of demand of duty of Rs. 20,33,845 and penalty of equivalent amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and another penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed under Rule 173Q of the Rules. 2. The appellant is manufacturing Electrical Apparatus having the Logo LK with a certain mar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... twari the ld. JDR appeared for the Revenue. 4. Shri J.C. Patel states that the order suffers gravely inasmuch as the impugned order assumed that the appellant had used somebody s trade mark. Whereas infact, they have affixed the applicants own trade mark not the trade mark or house mark of their foreign collaborator. He states further that paragraph 2.4 of the technical collaboration is only an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e we are prima facie of the view that the applicant has made a strong case. Hence we grant unconditional waiver of stay of the recovery of the amounts demanded under the impugned order including fine. As far as the fine is concerned on the petitioner filing usual undertaking authorities namely not to transfer sale of the assets; the adjudicating authority will allow the applicant use of the same f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X