2000 (9) TMI 986

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri V.K. Chaturvedi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The Commissioner vide his impugned order has confirmed demand of duty and imposed penalty upon the appellants on the two grounds - first that the appellants were using the brand name of another manufacturer M/s. Marinoply & Chemicals Ltd., who is a large scale manufacturer of plywood not entitled to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ants against the above order which was disposed of by the Tribunal by an order dated 12-6-1998, reported in 2000 (124) E.L.T. 741 (T) = 1998 (28) RLT 36 (T). It was held by the Tribunal that the markings in question cannot be said to indicate any connection in the course of trade between the said goods and the alleged owner of the trade marked M/s. Marinoply & Chemicals Ltd. Based upon the same....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y observing that the same has been made on the date of hearing and was a tactic for delaying the proceedings. The appellants have strongly agitated that the Commissioner has relied upon statements of several persons mentioned in the show cause notice, who should have been tendered by the Commissioner for cross-examination. There is no law requiring the noticee to seek cross-examination of the pers....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h the ld. counsel that the request for cross-examination of the deponents of the statements having been made by the appellants well before the conclusion of the personal hearing and as such was required to be considered by the adjudicating authority. Such a request could not be rejected on the sole ground that the same was made at the time of personal hearing and not at any time prior to the heari....