Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Kwality Ice Cream Co. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 10 June, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(112)ELT57(TRI-DEL)
ORDER V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)
1. The issue involved in this appeal is about the availability of benefit of Notification No. 175/86 in respect of Ice Cream manufactured and sold under the brand name 'Kwality' by the appellants.
2. Shri A.P. Mathur, ld. Advocate, submitted at the out set that he is only pressing the point of limitation under Section 11A or the Central Excise Act. He submitted that the entire demand is time barred as the show cause notice was issued on 13-7-1992 for demanding the duty for the period from 20-3-1990 to 31-10-1991. The entire period of demand is beyond the normal period of six months as specified in Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. He further mentioned that the Central Excise duty was imposed by Budget of 1990 with effect from 20-3-1990. Immediately, the Range Superintendent, under letter dated 27-3-1990, asked them to clear the goods on payment of duty as they were using the brand name 'Kwality' pertaining to other unit. The matter was disputed by them. Ld. Advocate contended that this shows, that the Department had knowledge about their using the brand name 'Kwality' and also availing the benefit of notification as the goods were cleared without payment of duty. Accordingly, suppression of facts cannot be alleged against them.
3. Shri V.M. Udhoji, ld. JDR, reiterated the findings of the ld. Collector in the impugned order. He also mentioned that the figures of clearances were not available with them for issuing the demand.
4. We have considered the submissions of both sides. It is apparent from the letter dated 27-3-1990 written by the Superintendent, Range Urban-II, IDO, Allahabad directing the appellants to obtain the Central Excise licence, to follow the procedure and pay duty forthwith that department was aware of the use of brand name by the Appellants. This letter itself is sufficient to show that the Department had the knowledge about the appellant's manufacturing and selling the Ice Cream under the brand name of 'Kwality'. As such, it cannot be alleged by the Department that any material fact was suppressed by the appellants with an intention to evade payment of duty. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order on time limit itself without going into the merits of the case. The Appeal is thus allowed.