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 DEELUX CABLE INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, JAIPUR-I

2015 (11) TMI 1240 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of SSI Exemption - whether or not the main appellant manufactured and cleared cables using another person's brand name - Held that:- Even if it is conceded that such manufacture on the brand name of Deelux Premium is due to an error in the supply of print block, the appellant cannot escape the consequences of such error resulting in duty liability. Other than this, there is no direct or corroborative evidence to establish that the appellant manufactured and cleared cables with brand name .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

substantially relying on the statements of various people which were retracted later cannot be sustained, as the basic requirement of establishing the veracity of these statements by cross-examination has not been done. - Brand name of DEELUX has been in the use of the appellant for many years before coming into existence of Deelux Cable & Wire Pvt. Ltd. having different brand name Deefux Premium. In fact both the brand names were sought to be registered on the same day. However, the brand n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ble - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 1622-1623, 1631-1633 of 2012 & 50406 of 2014 - Final Order Nos. A/53296-53301/2015-EX(DB) - Dated:- 29-10-2015 - Sulekha Beevi C.S and B Ravichandran, JJ. For The Appellants : Shri K K Anand & Ms Surabhi Sinha, Advs. For The Respondent : Shri R K Mishra, AR (DR) Per: B Ravichandran: These six appeals are being taken up together as the issue involved is same. The main appellant, M/s Deelux Cable Industries, are engaged in the man .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e learned Commissioner confirmed the demand of excise duty of ₹ 70,80,969/-. He imposed penalties on the unit and Shri Deepak Sharma, son of Shri Major Kumar Sharma, proprietor of the appellant unit. The cables seized in various premises were also confiscated but allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine. The appellants are before us against this impugned order. The learned Counsel Shri K.K. Anand submitted that the whole case of Revenue was based on presumptions and on certain selective r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntenable. The order is to be set aside on this ground alone ; (ii) The appellants have been manufacturing cable since 1980 using the brand name "DEELUX". In 2006 they have applied for registration of their brand name. On the same day the Deelux Cable & Wire Pvt. Ltd. have also applied for registration of their brand name "DEELUX PREMIUM". While the registration of 'Deelux Premium' was approved, the registration for 'Deelux' which is their brand name is sti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ason for the cables found with the brand name of Deelux Premium was explained as error in supply of print block by the supplier; (iv) The enquiry with the dealers indicated that both Deelux and Deelux Premium Cables were available in the market and it is not proved that all their production are only Deelux Premium; (v) Their brand name 'Deelux' is part of the brand name 'Deelux Premium' that will bring association with another person making cable is not tenable. They were in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Authority; (vii) There is no tenable evidence with any corroboration to establish the case of Revenue that ail their production and clearance during February 2006 to July 2010 has been only with brand name of Deelux Premium. The whole demand is based on presumptions only. 2. The learned AR Shri R.K. Mishra reiterated the findings of the Original Authority and stated that the retraction of statements should not be given credence. The seizure of cable with another persons brand name in the premise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

disputed:- (a) The appellants are in the business of manufacture of cables with their unregistered brand name 'Deelux' sometime from 1980 onwards. The appellants are the proprietorship concern. From February 2006 another unit Deelux Cable & Wire Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur got the brand name "Deelux Premium" registered for similar types of cables. This is a private limited company with some of the family members of the proprietor of the appellant as Directors; (b) Cables worth ͅ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gned order heavily relies on statements given by various persons. The cross examination of these persons were denied. The reason quoted by the Original Authority is elaborated by him in para 79 of the impugned order. He stated that all noticees and co-noticees have been provided all the materials which were relied upon and they have replied to the show cause notice. In such situation, the cross-examination of these persons is not relevant especially when the allegations are based on documentary .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reasoning and the conclusion as strange and untenable. As noted earlier, the case substantially relies on statements of Shri Narpat Singh and various dealers which were used against the appellant. Other than these statements, the other material evidence as claimed by the Original Authority is only the seizure of cables worth ₹ 10,62,456/- at the premises of the appellant bearing brand name 'Deelux Premium'. The Revenue's case is that through out the period of demand the appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

an this, there is no direct or corroborative evidence to establish that the appellant manufactured and cleared cables with brand name of 'Deelux Premium' during the whole of period of demand. On the contrary there are evidence, both documentary and through statement, that the appellant did manufacture cables with their brand name "DEELUX" during the impugned period. During the hearing the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted copies of large number of invoices from 1986 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

antially relying on the statements of various people which were retracted later cannot be sustained, as the basic requirement of establishing the veracity of these statements by cross-examination has not been done. 6. We take up the second allegation of the Revenue to the effect that the brand name 'Deelux' is deceptively similar to 'Deelux Premium' which belongs to the company owned by family members of the appellant and, hence, the SSI exemption is to be denied. We find the Ori .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

group. The brand name owned by another company was used by R.P. Traders. In the present case, the admitted fact is that the brand name of DEELUX has been in the use of the appellant for many years before coming into existence of Deelux Cable & Wire Pvt. Ltd. having different brand name Deefux Premium. In fact both the brand names were sought to be registered on the same day. However, the brand name 'DEELUX' is yet to be registered. Though the word "DEELUX" is an invented w .....

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