<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (7) TMI 893 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345781</link>
    <description>The appellant, engaged in manufacturing bolts/nuts, claimed small scale unit exemption under Notification No.8/2001-CE. However, the Tribunal upheld the Central Excise liability on seized goods and penalties, as distinct brand names on the goods rendered the appellant ineligible for the exemption. The Tribunal agreed that penalty under Section 11AC cannot be imposed on uncleared goods in the factory but stated duty would apply upon redemption. The presence of any symbol indicating a trade connection satisfied the brand name condition, disqualifying the appellant. The appeal was dismissed, with modifications reducing the fine and penalty for goods still in the factory.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2017 18:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=483099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 893 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345781</link>
      <description>The appellant, engaged in manufacturing bolts/nuts, claimed small scale unit exemption under Notification No.8/2001-CE. However, the Tribunal upheld the Central Excise liability on seized goods and penalties, as distinct brand names on the goods rendered the appellant ineligible for the exemption. The Tribunal agreed that penalty under Section 11AC cannot be imposed on uncleared goods in the factory but stated duty would apply upon redemption. The presence of any symbol indicating a trade connection satisfied the brand name condition, disqualifying the appellant. The appeal was dismissed, with modifications reducing the fine and penalty for goods still in the factory.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>