PRAKASH UDYOG SAMITI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON issue involved in these appeals, therefore, are being taken up together.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case that three show cause notices were issued to the appellant for denial of benefit of small scale exemption Notification No. 88/88 -C.E. on the ground that they are not the owner of the brand name. M/s. Prakash Gramodyog Ltd. is clearing the goods i.e. detergent powder under the brand name shaving plus which is belonged to M/s. Corona Plus Industries Ltd. M/s. Prakash Gramodyog Ltd. contested the show cause notices on the ground that they are owner of the brand name as they are manufacturing different goods than the goods manufactured by M/s. Corona Plus Industries Ltd. The adjudicating authority held that M/s. Prakash Gramodyog is the owner of the brand name and dropped the demand. However, an appeal filed by Revenue the Tribunal (CEGAT), now CESTAT held that the brand name does not belong to M/s. Prakash Gramodyog and confirmed the demand which relates to normal period of limitation. Against this order passed by the Tribunal the Revenue as well as Prakash Gramodyog Ltd. filed appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 30 -9 -2004 remanded the matter to the Tribunal to decide the issue of limitation afresh and also to consider whether the assessee is entitled to claim ownership in respect of the brand/trade name for the period 6 -10 -97 to 22 -12 -2003.

(3.) SUBSEQUENT to the order passed by the Tribunal the Revenue requantified the duty as the Tribunal confirmed the demand for normal period of limitation. The appellant filed appeal against that order also. All the appeals are being taking together.