C.C.E. & S.T.-VADODARA-I AND ORS. Vs. TAJ HABERDASHERY PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
P.K. Das, Member (J) -
(1.)THESE appeals are arising out of a common order and therefore, both are taken up together for disposal.
(2.)THE relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee was engaged in the manufacture of Zip Fasteners classifiable under Heading No. 9607.0000 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. On 18.1.2005, the Central Excise Officers of Head Quarter Preventive unit visited the assessee's factory and found that they were manufacturing Zip Fasteners bearing brand name MIG, GVM and TLR belonging to M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. and cleared without payment of full rate of duty and wrongly availed SSI exemption Notification No. dt. 1.3.2003. The said officers seized the goods bearing brand name of other persons. Show cause notices were issued proposing demand of duty alongwith interest and to impose penalty on the assessee and its Managing Director, denying the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No. dtd. 1.3.2003 (SSI exemption for assessee availing Cenvat Credit) on the ground that the assessee cleared their products Zip Fasteners bearing brand name of MIG, GVM and TLR belonging to M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. to their own central depot.
The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 5,09,803/ - short paid on goods bearing brand name of M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. and also Rs. 16,000/ - on the goods cleared without payment of duty alongwith interest, and the amount of Rs. 16,000/ - as deposited was appropriated and adjusted against the duty liability. It has confiscated the seized goods and imposed redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/ - A penalty of Rs. 5,25,803/ - and Rs. 50,000/ - were imposed on the Assessee and its Managing Director of the assessee company respectively. By the impugned orders, Commissioner (Appeals), upheld the demand of duty of Rs. 5,25,803/ - alongwith interest and set aside the penalties on the assessee and its Managing Director of the company. The demand of Rs. 16,000/ - alongwith interest is set aside by way of remand with the direction to give an opportunity to the assessee to co -ordinate commercial invoices with the corresponding excise invoices. The Revenue filed the appeal against the setting aside of the demand of duty of Rs. 16,000/ - and penalty. The assessee also filed an appeal against the demand of duty of Rs. 5,09,803/ - alongwith interest.
(3.)AFTER hearing both the sides and on perusal of records, we find that the dispute relates to mainly, admissibility of exemption on manufacturing and clearance of Zip Fasteners with sliders bearing the brand name of TLR, MIG and TLR belonging to the Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. Advocate on behalf of the assessee submits that the sliders bearing the brand name or trade name were supplied by M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. to fix in the Zip fasteners and the SSI exemption cannot be denied to them, as the sliders were not manufactured by them. They have manufactured only Zip Fasteners, which do not bear any brand name. It is further submitted that Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. supplied the sliders to fix with the Zip Fasteners. Thus, the assessee have not used any brand name of others in their final products. She relied upon following decisions:
a. Maharashtra Metal Industries vs. CCE, Aurangabad - : 2003. 156. ELT. 399 Tri Mumbai
b. CCE, Hyderabad vs. Sri Industries Ltd : 2006. 193. ELT. 438 Tri. Bang.
c. Maharashtra Steels vs. CCE, Aurangabad : 2002. 146. ELT. 690 Tri. Mumbai
d. Vimal Printery vs. Collector of CE, Vododara : 1999. 110. ELT. 982
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.