2007 (9) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 9-1-07. The ld. Appellate Authority held that there was no iota of allegation that the Respondent had availed credit of input used in the manufacture of exempted goods for which SSI exemption was not deniable in respect of its own branded goods. Also he found that the goods manufactured with the brand of others was outside the purview of SSI exempti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Products - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 310 (S.C.) and submitted that the Respondent was rightly dealt by the ld. Adjudicating Authority imposing demand for two types of manufacture. One such type was that the product was carrying own brand name and other was carrying brand name of another. In view of such circumstance, the Respondent was not entitled to SSI exemption when nothing was admissible to him follo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ufacture of SSI exempted goods. Goods with brand name of another have suffered duty and that remained undisputed. When the factual matrix does not suggest any abuse of Modvat credit, Appellate Authority below came to right conclusion. Furthermore, Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. dated 1-3- 2003, does not deprive the Respondent from the respective SSI benefit. When there is no bar by law, Respondent s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X