Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Aidees Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

2015 (9) TMI 250 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Denial of SSI Exemption - Use of brand name belonging to other company - Bar of limitation - Held that:- it is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the finding of the first appellate authority to the effect that there was no suppression of fact, has not been interfered with. If the original authority had invoked the enhanced period of limitation on only one particular ground viz., suppression of fact and the appellate authority had set aside that finding, the larger period of limitation was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. For the Appellant : Mr. T. Ramesh For the Respondent : Mr. K. Mohanamurali JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) This appeal is filed by the assessee under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Heard Mr.T.Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. N. Mohanamurali, learned Standing Panel Counsel for the respondent. 3. The appellant is a Small Scale Industry. They are manufacturing linear measuring instruments falling under the heading 84.66 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

appears that a letter was sent way back on 25.1.1996 to the appellant calling upon them to pay full rate of duty, on the ground that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of Notification 1 of 1993 dated 28.2.1993. However, the appellant gave a reply dated 30.1.1996, served on the Department on 13.2.1996, to the effect that the equipments manufactured by them carried their brand name "Aidees Newall" and that this brand name is not that of anybody else so as deprive him of the be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.12.1998 Though the appellant had raised the question of limitation, the first appellate authority did not go into the question of limitation. This was in view of the fact that the first appellate authority accepted the contention that the brand name "Aidees Newall" belongs to the appellant. 7. However, the Department filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, as against the order of the first appellate authority. The Tribunal allowed the appeal 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

benefit of SSI notification? c) In the facts and circumstances, whether the entire demand is barred by limitation? d) In the facts and circumstances where the issue involved in the present case is interpretation of notification, whether it is correct to allege suppression with intent to evade payment of duty? e) In the facts and circumstances where the department had full knowledge about the manufacture of the goods under the licence of the foreign collaborator and use the name of such foreign .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

period of limitation. 9. We wish to take up the question of limitation first which was framed as question (c) at the time of admission of this appeal. 10. Section 11A prescribes two different periods of limitation. The first is a period of one year and the second is a period of five years. In cases where, the duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded, on account of any fraud or collusion or wilful misstatement or suppression of fac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rom the registration certificate. 12. Within a couple of months from the date of issue of the registration certificate, the Superintendent of Central Excise called upon the appellant to pay duty on the ground that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of the notification, vide his notice dated 25.1.1996. The appellant submitted a reply dated 30.1.1996 served on the Department on 13.2.1996. The show cause notice was issued two years thereafter viz., on 5.3.1998. 13. In the show cause noti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the statement made by the Chairman of the appellant. The relevant portion of para 3 of the order of the first appellate authority requires reproduction. Hence, it is reproduced as follows:- "I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the appellants. I find that the allegation of suppression is not sustainable in view of the fact that all material facts including copy of the technical collaborating agreement and the facts with regard to use of trade marks were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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