2008 (8) TMI 710

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal of the Revenue is against an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside a demand of duty on the respondents by granting them SSI benefit under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. There is no representation for the respondents today. The notice of hearing issued to them has returned with the postman's remark "left". No change of address has been intimat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nly in 1995. The buyer-company did not apply for registration of the brandname in their favour, either. In the circumstances, the finding of the lower appellate authority has only to be sustained. Accordingly, it is held that the goods in question were cleared by the respondents under their own brandname and they were eligible for SSI benefit. In relation to the other brandname, it was found by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he brandname 'South Safe'. Now that it has been held that the brandname 'South Safe' belonged to the respondents, the decision of the original authority for levy of duty on the goods, whether cleared under the brandname 'crystal' or cleared under the brandname 'South Safe', cannot be restored. On the other hand, the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the point has to be sustained. 3.  .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X