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

2016 (10) TMI 740 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (10) TMI 740 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Denial of SSI exemption - N/N. 8/2002-CE dated 01/3/2002 - imposition of penalties - confiscation of goods with an option to pay redemption fine - use of brand name belonging to other person - Held that: - we are dealing with the set of companies/firms which are owned or managed or related to a family. The numerous undertaking created, converted or close later, are all having business interconnection in one way or other. Even without going into the le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reason to interfere with the same. We also note no serious legal infirmity in this findings - appeals rejected - decided against appellant. - Excise Appeal Nos. 1382-1387 of 2007 - Final Order No. 54197-54202/2016 - Dated:- 19-10-2016 - Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Naveen Mullick, Advocate for the appellant Shri R.K. Manjhi, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran These six appeals are against the same impug .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the present appeals are that certain investigations were carried out by the officers of Central Excise in various premises of group of units, all connected to the manufacture or trading of goods with the brand name Plaza . On completion of detailed investigation, a show cause notice dated 08/07/2003 was issued to 8 noticees to demand Central Excise duty not paid by manufacturing assessees, to confisticate various seized excisable goods on different premises and also to impose penalties on units .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ld the original order. The present appeals are against this impugned order. 2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and also learned AR for Revenue and perused appeal records. The dispute, as already noted, in these present appeals are to the effect that the three manufacturing assessees have manufactured excisable goods using brand name of another person and accordingly were not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 8/2002-CE dated 01/3/2002. On examining the appeal pape .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the Notification No. 8/2002-CE. In other words they have not used brand name of another person. We have noticed that this central point has been dealt with elaborately by both the Original Authority and the first Appellate Authority. In fact, before proceeding with the dispute relating to assignment of this brand name to different manufacturers, the Original Authority examined the history of Plaza brand name from the origin to the impugned period. The facts as examined by the Original Authori .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ading on aforesaid goods. Further this partnership firm was taken over by Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta as proprietor M/s R.K. Cables Co. The proprietary firm was further taken over in 1997 by M/s Plaza Wires & Electricals Pvt. Ltd. and accordingly copyrights were also changed in the name of M/s Plaza Wires & Electricals Pvt. Ltd. having their head office at 21-E, Netaji Subhas Marg, Daryaganj. 4.5. Meanwhile in the year 2003 Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta, Prop. of M/s R.K. Cable Co. assigned the righ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; Electricals Pvt. Ltd. assigned Shri Bhimsen Gupta, the brand name plaza for electric irons, immersion rods, room heaters, heat converters, juicers, mixers, electric kettles, hand mixers, toasters & hot plates. M/s Plaza Products after inducting Shri Bhimsen Gupta as partner stopped payment of Central Excise duty by availing SSI exemption on the pretext that they were using the brand name Plaza , a brand name owned by them. 4.8 From the above facts it is apparently evident that brand Plaza .....

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