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 570 - CESTAT, BANGALOREDemand - SSI exemption - Under-valuation - Plywood - As regards the allegation of under-valuation it is noticed that the authorities had issued a show cause notice to sister concern of the appellant making the same allegation as to under-valuation of the plywood - Find that the very same evidences have been relied upon by the adjudicating authority to come to a conclusion that there is under-valuation of goods - At the time of preventive operation and also during follow-up action, no cash or any other incriminatory material was found, which would justify the conclusion of the Original Authority - there is no other corroborative evidence brought forth by the adjudicating authority for upholding the allegation that there was under-valuation of the good by the appellant - In the absence of any such contrary evidence on records, find that the judgment of the Tribunal in the appellant’s sister concern case will be squarely applicable - Held that the impugned order that there is under valuation is not sustainable. Brand name - The dealers have retracted the statements while replying to the show cause notice had have also in the cross-examination withdrawn the statement as has been recorded from them - When the officers visited the premises of the assessee, they did not find any incriminating materials as regards the use of brand name “Crown Ply” - In the absence of any corroborative evidence indicating that the assessee was using the brand name “Crown Ply” on the products manufactured and cleared by them, find that the impugned order holding so is not sustainable. Brand name of another person - Revenue has not proved beyond doubt that the assessee has been using the brand of “Crown Ply”, which is of another person on his goods in order to attract the mischief of brand name and denying the benefit of Notification 1/93 as amended - The impugned order to that extent is not sustainable.
|