2003 (9) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - These are two applications for waiver of pre-deposit as under :- (1) M/s. S.P. Packagings Rs. 1,45,808/- as duty (2) M/s. B.R. Oil Mills Rs. 88,701/- as duty 2. Shri Pankaj Mullick, learned Advocate, submitted that both the applicants manufacture PET Bottles; that the bottles manufactured by B.R. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned Order has confirmed the demand of duty on the ground that both the Applicants were using the brand name of each other on the PET bottles and as such the benefit of SSI Exemption Notification No. 9/2000/C.E. is not available to them. The learned Advocate contended that the mistake has occurred on account of change in the dyes received after being repaired from M/s. Kuldeep Engineering Work .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... brand name on the pet bottles is not of a manufacturer or trader using these bottles for packing. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. In view of the fact that the appellants went on using the dyes for 20 days, they have not made out a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of duty. Further we agree prima facie with the learned Departmental Repres .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X