https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49976 Clearances recorded in the name of M/s. Kunal Engineers were treated as clearances of M/s. Devendra Industries because the record showed no independent factory, machinery or materials with Kunal Engineers, and the panchnama and partner's statement were not displaced. The brand name "UDP" was found to belong to another concern and to have been affixed on 25 ginning machines, so small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93 was denied only to that extent. Penalty under Section 11AC was held inapplicable to clearances made before its commencement, while penalty under Rule 209A was sustainable against the partners. Duty and penalties were remitted for fresh quantification on the limited findings. en-us Wed, 19 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:09:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49976 Clearances recorded in the name of M/s. Kunal Engineers were treated as clearances of M/s. Devendra Industries because the record showed no independent factory, machinery or materials with Kunal Engineers, and the panchnama and partner's statement were not displaced. The brand name "UDP" was found to belong to another concern and to have been affixed on 25 ginning machines, so small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93 was denied only to that extent. Penalty under Section 11AC was held inapplicable to clearances made before its commencement, while penalty under Rule 209A was sustainable against the partners. Duty and penalties were remitted for fresh quantification on the limited findings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49976