TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 769
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri I. Baig, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President (Oral)]. - Heard the learned Advocate for the appellants and the DR for the respondent. 2. This appeal is being disposed of in terms of order passed today in Excise Stay Application No. 1814 of 2010. 3. This appeal arises from order dated 29-3-2010 pass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at some of the items under the brand name were disposed of as the traded items though they were manufactured by the appellants, a show cause notice dated 30-3-2009 came to be issued. The same was sought to be contested by the appellants. However, the Commissioner after taking into consideration the statement of the appellants and observing that the department had nowhere mentioned the fact of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h inference and even in the absence of proper evidence regarding the manufacture of such goods by the appellants and without ascertaining as to whether the respondent had sufficient evidence in support of the claim that the traded goods were not manufactured goods, the Commissioner proceeded to confirm the demand against the appellants. 7. Para 4 of the reply to the show cause notice reads....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....response to the show cause notice as above clearly discloses that though initially the appellants might have stated that traded goods were not bearing the brand name, the reply to the show cause notice disclose the circumstances in which such traded goods were affixed with the brand name. Obviously, in such circumstances, it was necessary to ascertain whether the appellants were having necessary m....