2018 (12) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the manufacture of hosiery needles and availing SSI exemption but using the brand name MEFA which was owned by M/s. Metal Fabrics India Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of investigation conducted, it was alleged that the assessee was using brand name of third party, therefore, they are not entitled to claim SSI exemption. Consequently, they are liable to pay duty and the proceedings were initiated against them. Based on the show cause notice, the demand of Rs. 55,16,494 plus Rs. 4,16,659 plus Rs. 2,34,704/- sought to be confirmed alongwith interest. The penalties were also proposed against the main assessee and their directors. The matter was adjudicated, Ld. Commissioner in the adjudication gave the benefit of extended period of limitation and th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... We find that while filing the declaration under Rule 173B of Central Excise Rules, 1944, the assessee has declared that they are using the brand name 'MEFA' which is their company's name and one such the declaration is extracted below:- 6. On going through the said declaration, we find that the assessee has declared the use of brand name 'MEFA'. Therefore, it cannot be alleged that the assessee has not declared the fact that of using the brand name of third party. In that circumstance, the Ld. Commissioner has rightly dropped the demand pertaining to the extended period of limitation. Therefore, we find no merit in the appeal of the Revenue, the same is dismissed. 7. Now come to the appeal of the assessee as well as co-appellants, we....