2005 (1) TMI 584

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Sheth, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Ajay Saxena, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 28,24,832/- (Rupees twenty eight lakhs twenty four thousand eight hundred thirty two only) and penalty of equal amount and penalty of Rs. 3 lakhs (Rupees three lakhs only) on its managing director .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Tribunal s order referred in 1999 (112) E.L.T. 122 (Tribunal)] wherein the view was held that exemption under the SSI notification cannot be denied on the ground that the invoices showed brand name of another person when the goods themselves did not bear any brand name. The Ld. SDR argued that the code number of the parts itself would indicate a connection in the course of trade between produc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cation. We note that the notification applicable during the period in dispute in the present case i.e. Notification No. 8/98 and 3/2002 does not contain any explanation. Identical explanation IX of Notification 1/93 which was considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Rukmani Pakkwell Traders. Further in the case of Rukmani Pakkwell Traders the brand name was affixed on the goods themselves on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X