2005 (11) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ese appeals, a common question of law and facts are involved and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law. The appellants are not contesting the case on merits but only on time bar. The Department received the intelligence and visited the appellants' factory on 5-11-1999 to verify the records. It was found that both the appellants were using the brand name "Melam" owned by M/s. MVJ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 238 (Tribunal), the issue was settled. It is the submission of the Counsel that the appellants held a bonafide belief that they were eligible to the benefit of exemption and hence, the demands should be set aside on time bar. The learned Counsel further relied on the judgment of the Chennai Bench rendered in the case of Queen Electrical Industries v. CCE....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ame has not been disclosed that by itself will not protect the demands from time bar. He pointed out that when the declarations have not been filed and details of use of brand name have not been disclosed, then extended period is invokable. In this regard, he relied on the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of BPL India Ltd. v. CCE, Cochin [2002 (143) E.L.T. 3 (S.C) = 2002 (50) RLT 24....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l not be extended to those manufacturers who affixes the specified goods with a brand name or a trade name (registered or not) of another person, who is not eligible for the grant of exemption under the Notification. Therefore, the appellants were required to have filed their declarations and disclosed the facts. In the case of Queen Electrical Industries, the appellant was filing declarations reg....