Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 1062 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (8) TMI 1062 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (323) E.L.T. 241 (SC) - SSI Exemption - on search goods with the Brand name of others found - whether assessee is manufacturing the goods under the brand name of others - Exemption under Notification No.13/92 CE dated 14.05.1992 - tribunal had concluded that, there was no tangible evidence on record to prove the manufacture of the aforesaid branded goods by the respondents in their factory premises. It is pointed out that the goods which were recovered an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

claration that the respondents are affixing the brand name 'Sunrise' on all their goods - decision of tribunal sustained - Decided against Revenue. - Civil Appeal No(s). 4605-4606/2005 - Dated:- 18-8-2015 - Mr. A.k. Sikri and Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv., Mr. P.K. Mullick, Adv., Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv., Mr. R.K. Srivastava, Adv. ORDER The respondents herein are engaged in the m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd conducted a search at their business premises as well. During that search the Officers found that apart from the Domestic Electrical Appliances manufactured under the brand name 'Sunrise', there were products of the same description lying in the premises bearing brand names 'National', 'Omega' and 'Philips' etc. Those goods were seized. The value of those branded goods was found to be ₹ 81,735/- in the factory premises and ₹ 52,120/- in the premises .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat as per the recovery panchnama dated 05.12.1997, which was drawn on the basis of documents seized from the manufacturing unit as well as trading premises of the respondents, the value of the goods manufactured and cleared by the respondents was in the sum of ₹ 1,05,32,030.00 involving Central Excise duty of ₹ 19,64,020.25. It was also stated in the show cause notice that after the seizure of the aforesaid goods, the respondents themselves had filed declaration under Rule 173B of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

9; etc. are concerned, which were recovered from the premises, the explanation given by the respondents was that these goods were purchased from the market and sold to various customers inasmuch as, apart from the manufacturing, the respondents were also doing trading business i.e. purchasing the goods of the aforesaid description from the market and selling the same to the prospective consumers. Regarding the declaration filed under Rule 173B of the Rules it was explained that since the value o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0.25 and penalty of equal amount was also levied on the respondents. The respondents preferred appeal there-against before the Commissioner, which was dismissed by the Commissioner vide order dated 17.07.2003. Not satisfied with the outcome of this appeal the respondents approached the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal has accepted the version of the respondents and allowed the appeal in its final decision dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version