1998 (1) TMI 232

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. Shri Pradeep Jain, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. -  These are appeals by the Revenue against the Order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Ghaziabad, holding that the respondents herein are entitled to concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 as amen- ded. 2. The brief facts ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rupees during the year 1989-90 and 1990-91. Show Cause Notices were issued proposing denial of the benefit of the notification and proposing recovery of duty. The Assistant Collector by separate adjudication orders confirmed the demands of duty. appeal, the Collector (Appeals) accepted the contentions of the respondents herein holding that "in the present case after the assignment of trademark,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal. 3. We have heard Shri H.K. Jain, ld. SDR and Shri Pradeep Jain, ld. Advocate. We find that both the brand name owners, namely, M/s. Har Karan Dass Deep Chand and M/s. Deep Chand Arya Industries were registered SSI units and in fact, the certificates of registration had been produced before the Assistant Collector. Therefore, both the above brand name holders are eligible for SSI exemp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fit of the notification, the Department would have to show that the brand name holders are not eligible for the grant of exemption. This, however, is not the case as, the brand name owners have already been found to be eligible for the grant of exemption by virtue of their registration as SSI units by the Directorate of Industries. Therefore, there is no warrant for denying the benefit of concessi....