TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (4) TMI 942
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brand name "RATTAN". They are registered with the Central Excise Department and availing the benefit of SSI exemption. The said show cause notice was issued on the ground that the respondents were found using brand name "RATTAN" which was a registered name of M/s. Rattan Hammers since 1989. The Commissioner by the impugned order has held that the brand name "RATTAN" was registered on 29-8-1997 in the name of M/s. Rattan Hammers with effect from 13-3-1989. It was registered in the name of the respondents on 21-11-2005 with effect from 1-11-1996. The Commissioner has further held that since the respondents duly got the brand name "RATTAN" registered in their name, it appears that they had followed the proper procedure. It has been further observed that the contention of the respondent that "RATTAN" has been registered as their brand name since 1996, the same goes in their favour and the respondents being co-owner of the brand "RATTAN" did not indulge in an intentional act to avail benefits of the goodwill of others. Further, once the brand name is registered in the name of the assessee, it cannot be said that they had used the brand name of others. Having held so, the Commissioner h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant to disallow the benefit of the SSI exemption to the respondents. He further submitted that the very fact that the respondents were granted registration of the brand name "RATTAN" with effect from 1996 though certificate in that regard was granted in 21-11-2005, the same clearly discloses that the use of brand name was not in relation to any brand name or trade name belonging to others but it lawfully belonged to the respondents themselves. Once the ownership of the brand name was conferred by the competent authority, there was no scope for the Excise authorities to doubt about the right of the respondents to avail the benefit under SSI exemption. As regards the bar of limitation, he submitted that the finding arrived at by the learned Commissioner is clearly borne out from the record and it was within the knowledge of the Department pursuant to the declaration filed by the respondents regarding the use of the brand name "RATTAN" and hence there was no scope for the Central Excise Department for invoking the extended period of limitation. He further submitted that at this stage, there is no order adverse to the interest of the respondents so as to justify withholding of the amou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) where the specified goods, being in the nature of components or parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances, are cleared for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances by following the procedure laid down in the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 : Provided that manufacturers, whose aggregate value of clearances of the specified goods for use as original equipment does not exceed rupees one hundred lakhs in the financial year 2002-2003 as calculated in the manner specified in paragraph 1, may submit a declaration regarding such use instead of following the procedure laid down in the said Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001; (b) where the specified goods bear a brand name or trade name of - (i) the Khadi and Village Industries Commission; or (ii) a State Khadi and Village Industry Board; or (iii) the National Small Industries Corporation; or (iv) a State Small Indust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Biscuits Industries Ltd. and Mahaan Dairies, question of grant of such benefit in the absence of such specific plea in that regard being raised and the evidence produced in that regard, the same can not be available to the respondent. 13. As regards the bar of limitation, undisputedly, the finding arrived at by the Commissioner reads thus : "The notice in their reply to the show cause notice have placed on record a copy of the declaration under Rule 173-B filed by them with effect from 1-7-97. I observe that the noticee has specifically mentioned in their declaration that they were using brand "RATTAN".The declaration has been duly 'verified and found in order' by the jurisdictional Sector Officer and Range Officer of (Central Excise Range-VII, Ludhiana) on 14-7-97. It means that the fact of noticee using "RATTAN" form the Central Excise authorities. Now the Central Excise department cannot claim that the facts were concealed by the noticee and were not in the knowledge of the department. In that case, I observe that under the aforesaid circumstances, invoking provisions of extended period under Section 11A(1) is not tenable." 14. Apparently, it discloses that the finding....