Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2010 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (7) TMI 474 - CESTAT, NEW DELHIBrand name - SSI Exemption - The Joint Commissioner had denied the SSI benefit under Notification No. 8/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 to the appellants on the ground that the brand name GLACIER used by the appellants belongs to another person - imposed duty and penalty - The appellants themselve have admitted that the brand name used by the appellants was owned by some other person, the question of Department leading any further evidence in this regard does not arise unless the assessee either disputes the statement in that regard or place before the authority any material which would reveal the statement to be either incorrect or doubtfu - It is difficult to accept the contention on behalf of the appellants that the Department was unable to produce evidence regarding the fact that the said brand name belonged to some other person - Question of leading evidence of a undisputed fact does not arise. In the returns filed during the relevant period by the appellants, the same disclosed that the brand name belonged to the appellants. The fact that it belonged to some other person was revealed for the first time on 19-6-2007 - A show cause notice was issued on 5-10-2007. Obviously therefore, the Department was entitled to invoke the extended period of limitation as the relevant fact was suppressed from the Department till June, 2007. - Hence, the appeal is fails and is dismissed.
|