9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eration after filtering out unnecessary details are, appellant-assessee was undertaking trading of Ultrasonic Plastic Welding and Cleaning Machines and manufacturing of Horns and Fixtures made out of imported materials of Aluminium during the period from May 1999 to March 2004. They manufacture Horns and Fixtures with brand name Branson ; they did not discharge the Excise duty during the relevant period. The appellant-assessee himself approached the department informing about their activities furnishing the particulars of clearance value and requesting the department to issue a show-cause notice for granting registration and for paying the duty for the past period. In the case in hand appellant before getting the show-cause notice discharge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant-assessee were having another unit by name Sweco India where they were manufacturing Separator and Vibrator equipment and they were paying Central Excise duty as they were affixed with brand name Branson . It is his submission in this appeal; appellant has not clearly spelt out a law and he was under a bona fide belief that duty liability does not arise. It is his submission that the appellant should have approached the departments if they were under such belief and should have filed a annual declaration. He would submit that there was no bona fide belief and there was a clear intention to evade payment of Central Excise duty. It is settled law as there was suppression or fraud or mis-statement etc. and with an intention to eva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the department to establish that the appellant had intentionally evaded payment of excise duty. Whereas, as already stated, in the instant case, the appellant, on his own, approached the department, after obtaining opinion of his consultant, and informed about their activities and clearance value with request to issue SCN for granting central excise registration and for payment of duty for the past periods. Had there been any intention on the part of the appellant, there was no need for the appellant to approach the department on his own. Though, the duty due to the government was not paid by the appellant during the material period i.e. May, 1999 to March, 2004, the same can be compensated by collecting interest from the appellant. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces, as held already, there was no intention on the part of the appellant to evade payment of duty. But it was inaction on the part of the appellant for not taking central excise registration and paying excise duty during the period under dispute. That inaction was on account of fact that the appellant was under bonafide belief that his activity did not amount to manufacture, clearance figures were within the SSI exemption limit and further there were conflicting decisions with regard to. eligibility of SSI exemption, when the goods were sold with a brand name of foreign person or trader." As against the above said findings recorded by the first appellate authority there is no effective counter in the appeal filed by the Revenue. In my vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
