Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (9) TMI 345 - CESTAT, NEW DELHISSI Exemption- Notification No. 8/98-C.E.dated 02.06.1998- The respondents manufacture medicines falling under Chapter Heading No. 30.03; when the officers visited the factory on 11-2-03, they found Oyximos-L/30vMI packed in cartons bearing batch no., manufacturing date and expiry date. The original authority held that the insignia/monogram affixed by the respondents on the packing of the goods cleared by them make the said goods as branded goods and that the brand names belong to M/s. OYSTER Lab Ltd./M/s. Focus Health Care Pvt. Ltd. and therefore they were not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 8/98-C.E. dated 2-6-98. Accordingly, he confirmed the demand of Rs.20,828/- along with interest and imposed equal amount as penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 173Q of CER, 1944. In the light of the decision of Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy v. Grasim Industries Ltd. reported, in which Hon’ble Supreme Court held that “It is not necessary that the name or the writing must always be a brand name or trade name in the sense that it is normally understood. The exemption is only to such parties who do not associate their products with some other person held that- In the present case, it is clear that the names, the other details in the labels and the monograms/logo taken together clearly indicate a connection between the product and the company/firm which markets the product. This clearly amounts to use of brand name in terms of the explanation given in the notification itself for the said expression. In view of the above, we hold that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order of demand of duty of Rs.20,128/- along with interest and setting aside the penalty of equal amount cannot be sustained. Therefore, we set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent as above and the order of the original authority in this regard is restored. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
|