2012 (6) TMI 729

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st and the equal amount of penalty. 2. Briefly stated facts relevant for this appeal are that on 12th of September, 1997 preventive staff of Central Excise, Delhi visited the appellant's premises on the basis of information that the appellant was manufactured and clearing bags and caps under the brand name Reebok and Nike to M/s. Sierra Industrial Enterprises (P) Ltd. The appellant was neither registered with the Central Excise Department nor he was paying excise duty on the said goods. Statement of Sandeep Khanna, Partner of the appellant firm was recorded by the excise officers on 12th September, 1997, wherein he is stated that the appellant firm was trading in the caps and bags and the firm supplied caps and bags to M/s. Sierra I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bunal vide its order dated 26th March, 2003 remanded the matter back with the direction to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal afresh after affording the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 6. The Commissioner (Appeals) pursuant to the remand order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant rejected the appeal on merits, however, findings some calculation errors in the Order-in-Original he modified the demand of duty to Rs. 6,07,550/-. It is against said order, the appellant has come in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Learned Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate assailing the impugned order has pleaded that the Adjudicating Authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals) have failed to appreciate ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds without payment of excise duty and without obtaining registration, as such, this is a case of concealment and suppression of fact which entitles the department to invoke the extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. 9. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the record. The main issue which requires consideration of the Tribunal in this appeal is whether or not the appellant has manufactured and cleared the disputed caps and bags under the brand name Reebok and Nike to M/s. Sierra Industrial Enterprises (P) Ltd. and M/s. Reebok India Ltd. 10. Undisputedly the appellant during the period in question sold caps and bags to M/s. Sierra Industrial Enterprises (P) Ltd. an....