2004 (2) TMI 498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. Vide the impugned order the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune has confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 16,35,727/- on the appellants and imposed penalty equal to duty upon them on the ground that they had wrongly availed small-scale exemption under Notification 1/93, dated 28-2-1993 during the period 1-4-1994 to 30-11-1995 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... me owner, in the light of the ratio of the Larger Bench decision in the case of CCE, Chandigarh v. Fine Industries - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 53. On time bar also the appellants do not have a case in view of the clear finding that the appellants declared in the classification list/declaration that they were not using the brand name of any other factory, which has been found to be a clear deliberate misde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X