LAL INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above appeal arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) upholding duty demand of Rs. 96,985/ - confirmed on Shri B.M. Saravanan, Proprietor of M/s. Lal Industries, invoking extended period of limitation, levying interest and also imposing penalty of an amount equal to duty on Saravanan case of the department is that M/s. Lal Industries used the brand name of Alpha belonging to M/s. Alpha Electronics, a proprietary concern of Shri T. Augustine, on stabilizers manufactured and cleared by them.

(2.) HEARD both sides. The case of the department is based upon a statement of Shri Saravanan who clearly admitted that he had manufactured and sold stabilizers affixed with Alpha brand to M/s. Alpha Electronics and that the brand Alpha was owned by Shri T. Augustine, proprietor of Alpha Electronics and the corroboration by Shri Augustine that brand Alpha was owned by him and he purchased the stabilizers from Lal Industries. Ld. consultant, however, seeks to rely upon the cross -examination of Augustine in which he has stated that he purchased unbranded stabilizers from Lal Industries and that Lal Industries did not have the capacity to manufacture such large quantity of stabilizers. We find that evidence on record clearly establishes the clearance of branded stabilizers by the Assessee. The lower appellate authority has also dealt with the subsequent change in stand in the cross examination of Shri Augustine. He has noted that statements of M/s. Lal Industries and Shri Augustine were voluntary and no protest was registered. In other words, he has found that neither of the statements was retracted. The department having made out a clear case of clearance of branded goods, the benefit of the SSI notification is admittedly not available to the Assessees. Therefore, the demand and penalties are to be sustained. We accordingly uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.