9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 986X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. The Commissioner vide his impugned order has confirmed demand of duty and imposed penalty upon the appellants on the two grounds - first that the appellants were using the brand name of another manufacturer M/s. Marinoply Chemicals Ltd., who is a large scale manufacturer of plywood not entitled to the benefit of small-scale exemption Notification No. 175 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by an order dated 12-6-1998, reported in 2000 (124) E.L.T. 741 (T) = 1998 (28) RLT 36 (T). It was held by the Tribunal that the markings in question cannot be said to indicate any connection in the course of trade between the said goods and the alleged owner of the trade marked M/s. Marinoply Chemicals Ltd. Based upon the same allegation another show cause notice dated 31-3-1993, impugned bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tactic for delaying the proceedings. The appellants have strongly agitated that the Commissioner has relied upon statements of several persons mentioned in the show cause notice, who should have been tendered by the Commissioner for cross-examination. There is no law requiring the noticee to seek cross-examination of the persons prior to date of hearing. In reply to the show cause notice, the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e statements having been made by the appellants well before the conclusion of the personal hearing and as such was required to be considered by the adjudicating authority. Such a request could not be rejected on the sole ground that the same was made at the time of personal hearing and not at any time prior to the hearing. As such we feel that the impugned order should be set aside and the matters ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
