9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iana are engaged in the manufacture of Planner & Plano Milling Machines. They are clearing that goods by availing benefit of SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003. On intelligence received that the appellant is evading central excise duty by way of wrongly availment of SSI exemption as they were manufactured and clearing the goods under brand name 'SAGAR' which is registered in the name of another person M/s Sagar Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd., 418, Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana. The appellant was searched on 09.03.2011 and the documents were seized. Later on, a show cause notice was issued to deny the benefit of exemption Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 on the ground that the appellant is using brand n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nai). He also submits that initially the appellant was working in a partnership with his brother in the brand name M/s Sagar Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Unit No. 1 and using the brand name 'SAGAR'. The said brand name is common brand as it was initially registered by their father in 1955. The said partnership was dissolved and both the brothers were the owners of the brand name. The similar issue has already settled by the Apex Court in the case of Kali Aerated Water Works 2015(320) ELT 692 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR submits that the facts are slightly different as Sh. Amarjit Singh Director of M/s SMT has stated in the statement that the said brand name is being used since 1976 when their company was incorporated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2003 as the appellant is using the said brand name prior to the brand name registered for the other person. This issue also came up before this Tribunal in the case Novel Tronics Corporation (Supra) wherein the issue of denial of exemption under Notification before this Tribunal on the ground that the assessee was using brand name from 1993 where is the registered owner of said brand name which came into existence only in 1995. In these facts, this tribunal has observed as under: 2. After examining the records and hearing the learned JDR, we note that the appellate Commissioner's finding that the brand names in question belonged to the buyer is under challenge. The goods were cleared under two brand names, 'South Safe' and &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
