TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment 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. - He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he period 1st August, 2002 to 17th March, 2003 while claiming SSI exemption under the said Notification. Pursuant to the visit of the Department personnel to the factory on 1-8-2006 and investigation carried out thereafter, it was revealed to the Department that the appellants had been using the brand name GLACIER belonging to another person and therefore, they were not entitled for SSI exemption in terms of the said Notification and hence a show cause notice dated 5-10-2007 came to be issued to the appellants. The appellants contested the proceedings while contending that the brand name GLACIER does not belong to any other person but to the appellants themselves. The contention however, was not accepted by the Adjudicating Authority and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notice on completion of investigation. Since right from beginning it was sought to be represented that brand name belonged to the appellants, however, it was revealed only in 2007 that the same belonged to some other person during the relevant period, invocation of extended period for limitation could not be found fault with. 6. In order to avail the SSI benefit in terms of the said Notification, the condition stipulated under clause (4) read with Explanation IX of the said Notification need to be satisfied. The assessee has to disclose in the return that the brand name used for the product does not belong to any other person. It is not in dispute that necessary disclosure in that regard was made by the appellants. It was disclose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
