2001 (3) TMI 366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i M.P. Singh, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T) ]. -  The appellant is a Small Scale manufacturer of weighing scales. The goods are manufactured under an agreement with Terraillon of France. Small scale units were eligible to exemption under Notification No. 175/86, subject to the condition that goods bearing the brand name of another person would not be elig....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e under the bona fide belief that the use of brand name of another person would not make them ineligible for exemption. This was so because the High Court of Allahabad had stayed the operation of the provision relating to denial of exemption to the goods having the brand name of another person. Apart from these submissions, the Learned Consultant also stated that the duty demand in the present cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ether the goods were manufactured under the brand name of another person as a job work. The appellant only mentioned "not applicable" while filing the declaration. The Learned DR submitted that the Tribunal has held in the case of Sonoma Aromatics (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bangalore reported in 1995 (78) E.L.T. 285 (T) = 1994 (5) RLT 460 (CEGAT-C) that non declaration of brand name would amount to suppr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mtech Systems Ltd. v. C.C.E., New Delhi, 2000 (115) E.L.T. 238 that the use of a brand name of a foreign company would also bring the goods within the scope of the exception in respect of branded goods in Notification No. 175/86. The appellant's defence raised on the ground of bona fide belief also is not acceptable in the present case inasmuch as the stay order of the Allahabad High Court in peti....