TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. Therefore, from the statement, it cannot be said that the assessee has accepted the allegation of the Revenue. Whether the goods were manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd.? - Held that: - the goods exported by M/s New Zhong Yuan Ceramics Import & Export Co. Ltd. were manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. - Revenue has heavily relied upon the verification of internet, from which it can only be known that brand name embossed on the goods imported are belonging to XinZhong Yuan Ceramics Co. Ltd. i.e. XNY. - Without any detailed investigation, merely on assumption basis, the Revenue came to the conclusion that the goods were not manufactured by M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue concluded that the goods were not manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. Therefore, the condition of the exemption Notification has been violated, hence, the assessee is liable for payment of anti-dumping duty. 2. Shri V.M. Doiphode, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the department has decided the entire case only on the basis of verification carried out on the Internet that the brand name under which the goods were imported are belong to XNY Ceramics Co. Ltd. However, the Revenue could not establish beyond any doubt that the goods were not manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. He submits that it is an admitted fact on record that the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffect that the assessee has accepted the allegation and paid anti-dumping duty, therefore, they cannot agitate at this stage. 3. Ms. P. Vinitha Sekhar, learned Joint Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that from the verification on internet, it was revealed that brand name under which the goods were imported does not belong to M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. Therefore, this is sufficient to establish that the said branded goods are not manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. Hence, they are not entitled for exemption of anti-dumping duty. The appellant admitting the allegation paid the anti-dumping duty and also waived the show-cause notice. Therefore, now they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is also fact on record that even on the basis of internet, though the brand name belong to a different company i.e. XinZhong Yuan Ceramics Co. Ltd., but the said company also belong to the same group where M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. belongs. Without any detailed investigation, merely on assumption basis, the Revenue came to the conclusion that the goods were not manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd. Here, it is not material that who is the brand owner, but the important factor is that irrespective of brand owned by any person, the goods should be manufactured by M/s Southern Building Materials and Sanitary Co. Ltd., which is not disputed, in our view as per the documentary evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
