Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (1) TMI 618

SSI Exemption - use of Brand name - It appeared to Revenue that the appellants are using the brand name of Radisson below the words chocolate box on the packing material - extended period of limitation - Held that: - extended period of limitation is not invocable in the facts and circumstances, as admittedly the appellants were all along registered with the Central Excise Department/Services Tax Department. They had been filing their service tax returns which have never been found to be untrue and rejected by the Revenue. The earlier show cause notice dated 03/06/2009 was finally settled in their favour and refund allowed in July, 2010. - The appellants had suo motu taken registration under Central Excise, in March, 2014 for manufacture .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

taurants, etc. Prior to 2010, the appellants were availing SSI exemption. There was an inspection by Anti-Evasion Wing of the Department on 11/09/2008 and pursuant thereto show cause notice dated 03/06/2009 was issued alleging that during checking of Radisson MBD Hotel at Noida, it was observed that there is a in-house bakery for the manufacture of cakes, pastries etc. situated in the premises of the Hotel, are being transferred to the pastry shop situated on the ground floor inside the Hotel. From the pastry shop, which is known as chocolate box the cakes pastry etc. are sold to the customers who visit the pastry shop namely the chocolate box. It appeared to Revenue that the appellants are using the brand name of Radisson below the words c .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ently the appellants applied for grant of Central Excise registration in April 2014, which was granted to them being certificate dated 24/04/2014. The reason stated by the Learned counsel for appellants for obtaining registration certificate is that they had started using the Radisson brand on the boxes used for packing and clearing pastry from their pastry counter. There was an inspection by the Anti-Evasion Wing on 26/06/2014 and pursuant thereto show cause notice dated 08/07/2015 was issued wherein it was alleged that the appellants are manufacturing and clearing dutiable food items namely chocolate and other food preparations containing cocoa falling under CETA 1806, pastry cakes and biscuits falling under CETA 1905, lemonade and fresh .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

l Excise Authority about their sale being more than ₹ 4 crores since 2008-09, nor they paid Central Excise duty on year-to-year basis from 2010-11 to 2014-15 and it was also alleged that from April 2014, the appellants have again started using brand name, have taken registration with the Department and are paying duty. However, in respect of beverages, they are still not discharging their liability. Accordingly, the appellants were called upon to show cause as to why Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 74,45,620/- be not demanded for the period June, 2010 to March, 2015 with proposal to appropriate ₹ 8 lakhs deposited vide Challan during investigation on 05/07/2014. Further penalty was proposed on the appellant company and .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

issued in June 2009, which was finally settled in favour of the appellants by Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in July, 2010 and subsequent grant of refund. Further, there was an audit during year 2010 in which the appellants had produced all the relevant documents more fully noticed hereinabove, before the audit team, up to the period March, 2010 and /till the date of audit. Further the admitted fact that the appellants were paying service tax also on the confectionery manufactured and consumed within its Hotel premises, either in their restaurant or in their banquet hall under various heads of service like restaurant service, Mandap keeper service, etc. Such service tax was paid on proper due dates and service tax ret .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

never been found to be untrue and rejected by the Revenue. The earlier show cause notice dated 03/06/2009 was finally settled in their favour and refund allowed in July, 2010. Further, there was audit by the Commissionerate in July, 2010 and their books of accounts, balance sheet etc. were all scrutinized and no objection was raised. Further, the appellants had suo motu taken registration under Central Excise, in March, 2014 for manufacture and clearance of branded confectionery. I hold that no case of mis-interpretation, suppression or concealment of facts is made out against the appellants. Accordingly I hold that the extended period of limitation is not invocable. So far the demand for the normal period is concerned I find that it is adm .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →