1995 (4) TMI 142
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o 10-7-1988 and `Fragrance Mat' during the period 1988-89 to 11-4-1989 is liable to Central Excise duty. Therefore, he directed the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Indore, Division II to redetermine the duty liability for the aforesaid period. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. He also rejected the contention of the appellants for the benefit of Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986. He has held that the Central Excise Officers are aware of manufacturing of plastic body on or after 11-7-1988 and there was suppression of manufacturing prior to 11-7-1988 and therefore, extended period of limitation would apply prior to 11-7-1988. As regards the product `Fragrance Mat', the Learned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ged that the appellants were affixing brand name `JET' on their excisable goods, which is a registered trade mark under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 in the name of Shri Kishan Matlani and, therefore, the benefit of small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 as amended was not available to the appellants. It was alleged that the Noticees had failed to obtain a Central Excise Licence and also paid Central Excise duty on the goods manufactured by them. Therefore, they were called upon to show cause as to why Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 10,67,776.70 should not be recovered from them under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and why a penalty should not be imposed upon them under Rules 9(2), 52A....