2019 (8) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emoval cream' as the brand name and the logo 'TVC Sky Shop' on the product alleged to belong to an entity that was not entitled to such exemption. The goods were also held to be liable to duty at the 'retail selling price' netted for the abatement prescribed in notification issued under section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, the original authority confirmed the differential duty of Rs. 5,23,674/- on the clearances effected between July 2004 and January 2005 as well as on the goods seized at the premises of M/s TVC Sky Shop Ltd. The seized goods were confiscated but permitted to be released on discharge of redemption fine of Rs. 51,000/-. In addition, penalties were imposed on the manufacturer, as well as the owner of the brand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... v. Diamond Scaffolding Co. [2011 (274) ELT 10 (Cal.)], with particular reliance on paragraph 6 and 7, was relevant to the bar of limitation. 3. Learned Authorised Representative contends that appellant had no locus standi to raise a challenge to valuation as these have been conceded before the lower authorities and that such a challenge could not be brought up for the first time before the Tribunal. He placed reliance on the decision of Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd v. Commissioner Of Central Excise, Rajasthan [2007 (215) E.L.T. 327 (SC)]. He also contends that the decision in re Omni Protect Drugs Pvt Ltd would not apply to the present case as the issue in dispute therein was the valuation system to be adopted on clearance of 'physic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, 1944 does not stand the test of reason. It is in the nature of scheme of alternative assessment under section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 that the manufacturer, literally wears his intent on his sleeve and the marking of the maximum retail price on the product is the surest indicator of the goods being intended for the retail customer. This clear manifestation of intent on the part of the appellant must inevitably lead to duty liability in accordance with section 4B of Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. Naturally such a resort is contingent upon non-eligibility for the exemption available to small scale unit under notification no. 8/2003- CE dated 1st March 2003. The appellant is a manufacturer and the brand/logo is not theirs. There is ....