Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 768 - AT - Central ExciseSSI exemption - use of brand name of others - Evasion of duty - Valuation - Short payment of duty - Penalty - Time limitation - Held that: - be due to ignorance on the part of the appellant firm, as disinfectant was an item notified under Section 4A during 2006-2007 also and during that period also, the appellant firm paid duty on transaction value under Section 4 while during that period, and as is clear from Annexure D-1 to show cause notice, duty payable on transaction value under Section 4 was more than the duty payable on assessable value determined under Section 4A and as such the appellant had paid excess duty to the tune of ₹ 2,19,478/- - the demand for recovery of this duty raised vide show cause notice dated 10/7/09 is time barred. The denial of SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/03-CE in respect of goods affixed with brand name is linked with the brand name being owned by some other person and, thus, for this purpose what is relevant is the ownership of the brand name - Since, the appellant did not disclose the relevant facts in respect of the clearances of goods affixed with brand name "5 CEES" and "KILLER" without payment of duty, extended period under proviso to Section 11A (1) has been correctly invoked for recovery of the duty short paid on this count. Penalty on Shri Vishal Makhija under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 has been correctly imposed as admittedly he received non-duty paid goods cleared by the appellant firm - Appeal disposed of.
|