https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238105 The judgment confirmed a demand of Rs.2,40,50,000 against the proprietor of M/s. Taj Products and imposed penalties under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The dispute centered on duty liability determination for unauthorized pan masala manufacturing under the brand name 'Chandrakanta.' Duty liability was confirmed from January 2011, with the appellant directed to deposit the penalty. The owner of the brand name was not held liable due to an agreement with the manufacturer. The judgment extensively analyzed duty liability, rule interpretation, and penalties for clandestine activities in pan masala production and clearance. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2015 15:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238105 The judgment confirmed a demand of Rs.2,40,50,000 against the proprietor of M/s. Taj Products and imposed penalties under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The dispute centered on duty liability determination for unauthorized pan masala manufacturing under the brand name 'Chandrakanta.' Duty liability was confirmed from January 2011, with the appellant directed to deposit the penalty. The owner of the brand name was not held liable due to an agreement with the manufacturer. The judgment extensively analyzed duty liability, rule interpretation, and penalties for clandestine activities in pan masala production and clearance. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238105