9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 787X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Garg and general public. As such, the Lower Authorities have rightly held that the appellant was using the brand name of another person while providing services and as such was not entitled to SSI exemption benefit. Extended period of limitation - the demand stands raised for the period 2009-10 - penalty - HELD THAT:- The issue involved is a bona fide issue of interpretation and there being no positive evidence indicating any mala fide on the part of the assessee, we are of the view that the demand is required to be restricted to the normal period of limitation - For the same reason, there are no justification for imposition of penalties upon the assessee. The matter is remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for re-quantifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be identical with a logo G subscribed on the same. The records were also being maintained at the premises of M/s Hotel Garg. 2. From the above, Revenue entertained a view that inasmuch as the present appellant M/s Amit Resorts were providing services under the brand name of M/s Hotel Garg, the benefit of SSI Exemption Notification cannot be availed by them in terms of proviso to Para 1 of the Notification. Accordingly, by way of issuance of a show cause notice dated 08 April, 2015, demand of service tax for the period 2009-10 to 2014-15 was raised against them. The same stands confirmed by the Original Adjudicating Authority to the tune of ₹ 4,15,523/- along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same was not a brand name or trade name. However, in the present case M/s Hotel Garg is not using expression Garg which is their family surname but a specifically designed G is being used by them thus indicating a connection between Hotel Garg and general public. As such we are of the view that the Lower Authorities have rightly held that the appellant was using the brand name of another person while providing services and as such was not entitled to SSI exemption benefit. 4. However, we note that the demand stands raised for the period 2009-10 onwards by invoking the longer period of limitation. The issue involved is a bona fide issue of interpretation and there being no positive evidence indicating any mala fide on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
