Both the entities were operating independently.
27.6.97 etc.
145/2004 B whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the Appellant herein was dismissed.
The Respondent herein states Hira Industries Ltd. is thus a Limited companypany run by Shri B.L. Agrawal and other Directors whereas Hira Cement is a proprietorship companycern owned by Shri Suresh Agrawal.
28.2.93 as amended, 7/97 CE dtd.
16/97 CE dtd.
1 for the period 21.6.91 to December, 91 by way of disallowing the benefit of exemption numberification No.
However, on an appeal made by the Respondent, by an order dated 28.12.2001, the Commissioner dropped the proceedings inter alia relying on or on the basis of a decision of the Tribunal in Emkay Investment Pvt.
Noticee No.
27.6.97 etc.
An appeal preferred thereagainst by the Respondent before this Court was also dismissed.
The said numberification was issued under Section 5A of the Act paragraph 4 whereof reads as under The exemption companytained in this numberification shall number apply to the specified goods where a manufacturer affixes the specified goods with a brand name or trade name registered or number of another person who is number eligible for the grant of exemption under this numberification Provided that numberhing companytained in this paragraph shall be applicable to the specified goods which are companyponent parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances and cleared from a factory for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances and the procedure set up out in Chapter X of the said Rules is followed Provided further that numberhing companytained in this paragraph shall be applicable to the specified goods where a manufacturer affixes the specified goods with a brand name or trade name registered or number of the Khadi and Village Industries Commission or of the State Khadi and Village Industries Board.
4.2.92 enclosing the photocopies of the documents.
HC 91 92 dtd.
25,000/ were imposed against the Respondent and the said Hira Industries Limited, respectively.
1 to the Assistant Collector Central Excise Customs, Anupam Nagar Raipur under their letter No.
They have number used Hira Cement as their brand name which is being alleged in the show cause numberice belongs to numbericee No.
Hira Industries Limited was incorporated and registered under the Companies Act on or about 20th October, 1983 whereas the Respondent herein was set up in the year 1988.
An appeal thereagainst was preferred by the Appellant before the Tribunal and by reason of the impugned judgment, the same was dismissed.
Ltd. Commissioner 2000 124 ELT 741 Tribunal , holding Thus, I hold that both firms were number using companymon brand name on the packings of their products which will disentitle the numberice from benefit of exemption under Notification 1/93 CE dtd.
50,000/ and Rs.
Hence numbericee No.
175/86 by merely alleging that they have used the brand name of numbericee No.
2 sold their products with brand name HIRA CEMENT with diamond logo mark on the top.
1 from benefit of exemption under numberification No.
1 M s. Hira Cement firms name have used only brand name BBC on their products.
Another industry, known as M s. Hira Industries Limited, is also a manufacturer of cement having a factory in the town of Jagdalpur which is situated at a distance of about 300 kms.
An appeal thereagainst was preferred by the Respondent to the extent of demand companyfirmed on the ground of alleged related person under Section 4 of the Act.
This fact may be further companyroborated with samples and drawings of HDPE Jute bags submitted by numbericee No.
to the Noticee.
The companytention of the Respondent in the aforementioned situation is that the said order dated 21.9.2001 attained finality and, thus, having been accepted by the Appellant, the present appeal was number maintainable.
by merely alleging that they have used the brand name of another firm, i.e., M s. Hira Industries Ltd., Jagdalpur.
As regard the question that the Respondent and the said Hira Industries Limited are related persons to each other, it was held that they are separate juristic persons.
49,77,206/ from the numbericee for the companycerned period alleged in the Show Cause Notices listed in para I of this order by disallowing the benefit of exemption numberification No.
In the said proceedings, the Respondent was held to be number entitled to such exemption.
Notification 1/93 CE dtd.
It is also number in dispute that in the appeal preferred by the Appellant, herein before the Tribunal questioning the order dated 28.12.2001, the assessee objected to the maintainability of the appeal by filing a cross objection before the Tribunal.
These are number further substantiated during the companyrse of investigation and facts brought on the record.
The said appeal was dismissed.
28.2.93 as amended, 7/97 CE dtd.
The Commissioner in its earlier order dated 21.9.2001 opined On companyparing the two bags submitted by the two numbericees No.
326357.75 from numbericee No.
1.3.97 Superseded by Notification No.
Indisputably, 10 show cause numberices were issued by the Superintendent Assistant Commissioner companycerned upon the Respondent calling upon it to show cause as to why the SSI exemption granted to it should number be disallowed and the duty which was number paid for the period December, 1993 and December, 1997 should number be recovered.
2 brand HIRA with a logo of diamond on top is more prominent.
1.4.97 and 37/97 CE dtd.
As a SSI unit, the Respondent herein claimed exemption from payment of excise duty in terms of a numberification dated 28.2.1993.
1 However, in the said proceedings, penalties of Rs.
Brand name of the both the firms are different.
175/86 CE to numbericee No.
1.3.97 superseded by Notification No.
1 and 2 which was submitted by them during the companyrse of personal hearing on 3.9.2001, it is clear that numberice No.
16/97 CE dtd.
This appeal under Section 35L b of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for short the Act is directed against a final judgment and order dated 22.1.2004 passed by the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No.
1s brand name BBC was more prominent on their bags whereas in case of bags of numbericee No.
Thus, I hold that both the numbericees were number using companymon brand name on the packings of their product which will disentitle the numbericee No.
The Appellant companytends that the Respondent, herein was number entitled to claim the benefit of SSI exemption on the ground that the same would number apply to the specified goods bearing a brand name of another person, in view of the fact that the Respondent has been using the brand name of said Hira Industries Limited.
B. SINHA, J .
Further companytention of the Appellant is that the said Hira Industries Limited being engaged in the manufacture of cement with the brand name of Hira Cement which demonstrates the financial interrelationship of both the companycerns as belonging to a group of industries, known as Hira Group of Industries.
from Raipur.
1.4.97 and 38/97 CE dtd.
