TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for disposal by this common order after hearing both sides. 2. The appellants are manufacturers of Corn Caps also known as Collous Caps with a brand name of Carnation on the said caps. The said brand name, namely, 'Carnation', belongs to a foreign company i.e. M/s. Cuxson Gerrard Co. Ltd., U.K., who vide their letter dated January, 1997 had authorised, the appellants, as licensed u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion during the year 1997-98 and 1998-99. Investigation also revealed that the said brand name was also registered and renewed in India in the name of M/s. Cuxson Gerrard Co. The notice seeking the confiscation of goods seized and demanding duty was issued on 11-3-99. Duty demand of ₹ 9,91,583.70 under the provisions of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, by disallowing the small scale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ific goods have been settled by the Apex Court in the case of Indian Mgt. Advisors Leasing Pvt. Ltd. [2002 (143) E.L.T. 241 (S.C)] in the context of a notification issued under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Following the same there would be no merit in these appeals as regards the eligibility to the notification. (b) However, we find that allegations made and determined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tled to the benefit of bar of limitation and the larger period under the provision of Section 11A(1) cannot be invoked, since an opinion existed for some time, that the assessee using the trade mark of another person i.e. M/s. Cuxson Gerrard Co., in this case could avail benefit of exemption, as held in a series of cases by this Tribunal. (see M/s. Intervalve (India) Pvt. Ltd., v. CCE C, Pune ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany was being. The law was settled by the Larger Bench decision and the Apex Court only in the year 2002. There are cases reported which have permitted the eligibility of the benefit of notification on this issue, we cannot uphold the penalties as arrived at in this case nor can uphold the duty demands invoked by applying the extended period of Section 11A(1). In this view of the matter these app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
