9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of another person is being cleared. In such case nothing prevented the Department from issuing the show-cause notice within a period of one year, which Department has failed - Moreover from August, 2001 itself the appellant started paying duty without availing exemption, at least the Department could issue a show-cause notice immediately in August, 2001 and before 22.02.2002, but the show-cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is 22.02.2001 to 10.08.2001. A show-cause notice was issued on 04.11.2003 proposing denial of SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2000-CE dated 01.03.2000 on the ground that the appellant is using the brand name of another person. In the adjudication, the demand was confirmed; penalty on the appellants Company as well as Shri Sachin Gandhi, Director of the appellants Company was imposed. Aggri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learance of Ivomac brand injection. Therefore, there is no suppression of fact on part of the appellant. The entire demand is time barred. 3. Shri B.K. Iyer, learned Superintendent (Authorised Representative) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the appellant have not submitted the agreement voluntarily and the same was submitted only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the show-cause notice within a period of one year, which Department has failed. This is not the case where the fact was suppressed, which was unearthed at a later date. In this case admittedly, the fact was brought to the notice of the Department prior to the clearance of the goods. Moreover from August, 2001 itself the appellant started paying duty without availing exemption, at least the Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
