2015 (12) TMI 1582

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri K. Poddar, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : R.K. Singh, Member (T)]. - Appeal has been filed against order-in-appeal 185/NS/GGN/2006, dated 30-6-2006 in terms of which excise duty demand of Rs. 48,682/- was confirmed along with interest and penalties on the ground that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 9/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003 because it cl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the said brand names admittedly did not belong to the appellant and so by implication they belonged to others and therefore, exemption benefit was correctly denied. 5. We have considered the contentions of both sides. Notification No. 9/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003, inter alia, states that "exemption contained in the notification shall not apply to the specified goods bearing the brand name o....