9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... updt. (AR) Per: S S Kang: Heard both sides. 2. Appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby confirmation of demand of duty along with interest has been upheld after denying the benefit of Notification No. 16/97-CE dated 1.4.1997. The Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The demand was confirmed after denying the benefit of Notification No. 16/97 for the period 30.9.1997 to 1.1.1998 by issuing a show-cause notice dated 5.5.1998 by invoking the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act on the ground that the appellant suppressed the material evidence with intent to evade payment of duty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacture, informed the Revenue regarding purchase of the unit of M/s Koteshwar Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. and before starting the production also filed necessary declaration. Therefore, the demand for normal period is time barred. This issue was raised before the adjudicating authority and also before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) noted this contention, however, he did not give any findings on the claim of the appellant that the demand for beyond the normal period is time barred. The appellant also submitted that in case the demand is confirmed, the appellant is entitled for cum-duty benefit. 5. The Revenue submitted that the ceramic tiles were manufactured by M/s Koteshwar Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. under unregistered br ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h logo of M/s Koteshwar Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi Vs. ACE Auto Comp. Ltd. reported in 2011 (263) ELT 3 (SC) after taking into consideration the issue identical to the present case held that to avail the SSI exemption benefit, manufacturer must establish that his product is not associated with some other person and the Hon'ble Supreme Court further denied the benefit of SSI exemption notification in all the goods which are manufactured with the brand name similar to TATA . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: - 14. Therefore, in order to avail of the benefit of the exemption notification, the assessee must establish that his product is not associated with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
