9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 701X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Counsels, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - Appeal No. E/538/2001 filed by the Revenue is against the dropping of demand of duty of Rs. 20,83,825/- by the lower appellate authority, which demand had been confirmed against the respondents by the original authority by denying SSI benefit under Notifications No. 140/83-C.E. and No. 10/99-C.E. for the period from 1997-9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not eligible for SSI benefit on account of the bar created under the Notifications. It was provided in the Notifications that the benefit of exemption thereunder would not be admissible to specified goods cleared under the brandname of another person. According to the Revenue, this bar had stood against the respondents claiming SSI benefit. In support of this plea of the appellant, the learned S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f M/s. Sree Ram Perfumery Works), the learned counsel submits that he had right to use the brandname by virtue of an Assignment Deed dated 1-9-1994 executed by Shri D.V. Surendranath Gupta, Proprietor of M/s. Vijaya Chemicals & Toilet Works. It is submitted that, by virtue of this assignment, Sree Ram Perfumery Works were in a position to use the brandname 'Asoka - S' within their assigned territo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame assigned to them. The case law cited by the learned counsel is in support of the appellate Commissioner's order. The learned SDR has referred to the Apex Court's judgment in Union of India v. Paliwal Electricals (P) Ltd. - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.), wherein the scheme of SSI exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was examined by the Court. There is no controversy with regard to this sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
