Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Kathuria Portfolios vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 17 July, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2003(158)ELT355(TRI-DEL)
ORDER S.S. Kang, Member (J)
1. Heard both sides.
2. Appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
3. In this case the benefit of small-scale exemption notification is denied to the appellants on the ground that they were clearing the branded goods.
4. The appellants are not challenging the demand of duty. The only contention of the appellants is that they are not liable for penal action because the issue relates to interpretation of notification.
5. The contention of the appellants is that they were engaged in the manufacture of leather articles and after cutting leather, the same was sent to the job workers, who were manufacturing the leather goods and affixing the logo of M/s. Archies Greetings & Gifts. They were under the impression that as the goods were actually manufactured by the job workers, they were entitled for the benefit of notification.
6. We found that as the issue involved in this appeal is in respect of interpretation of small-scale exemption notification, the penalty is set aside. The appeal is disposed of as indicated above.