TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll scale exemption notification would not get attracted - Following CCE Chandigarh vs. Fine Industreis [2002 (10) TMI 114 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI] and CCE Chandigarh vs. M/s. Bhalla Enterprises [2004 (9) TMI 109 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - no malafide suppression or mis-statement can be attributed to the appellant - the major part of the demand is beyond the normal period of limitation, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f show cause notice dated 16.4.03 alleging that the brand name Kirti belongs to M/s. Jupiter Metal Industries, who were using the same in respect of their final product, i.e. pipes. Accordingly, the notice proposes to deny the benefit of small scale exemption notification and to confirm the demand of Rs.1,18,586/- for the period 1.1.02 to 15.4.02. Another show cause notice dated 26.3.02 also sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Revenue. Apart from that we note that during the period there were decisions laying down that if the brand name is being used on two different products, the debarring clause of small scale exemption notification would not get attracted. Reference in this regard is made to Larger Bench decisions in the case of CCE Chandigarh vs. Fine Industreis [2002 (146) ELT 53 (Tri-LB)] as also to the Sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
