TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Avinash Prefabs vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore [1999 (9) TMI 549 - CEGAT, CHENNAI], where it was held that the words ‘KEB’ which stand for Karnataka Electricity Board affixed on the goods cleared by M/s Avinash Prefabs cannot be treated as brand name or trade name and the SSI exemption cannot be denied to the goods affixed with the words ‘KEB’ - the appellant will be entitled to the benefit of SSI N/N. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 2011 of 2012 - A/50534/2017-EX{DB] - Dated:- 31-1-2017 - (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Appearance Shri Amit Jain, Advocate for the appellant Shri H. C. Saini, AR - for the Respondent Per: V. Padmanabhan: The appellant manufactures various types of electric insulators chargeable to Central Excise duty under heading 8546 of the Central Excise Tariff. They are availing the benefit of SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/03-CE dated 1/3/03, as amended. The period of dispute in this case is from 2006-2007 to October 2009. During this period, the appellant had supplied the ceramic insulators to M/s Taruna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant alongwith interest on this duty under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, and appropriated an amount of ₹ 15,00,000/- paid by the appellant during investigation; and (c) imposed penalty of ₹ 72,59,227/- against the appellant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. 1.3 Against this order of the Commissioner, the present appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Amit Jain, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the word TDPL affixed on the ceramic insulators cannot be treated as brand name or trade name of the appellant s customers M/s TDPL, as the same are simply name of the appellant s customer M/s TDPL; that the words TDPL cannot be treated as brand name or trade name in terms of definition of this term as given in Explanation (A) to Notification No. 8/2003-CE, that the Tribunal in the case of Avinash Prefabs vs. CCE, Bangalore reported in 2001 (131) E.L.T. 415 (Tri. Chennai) has held that the words KEB which stand for Karnataka Electricity Board affixed on the goods cleared by M/s Avinash Prefabs cannot be treated as brand name or trade name and the SSI exemption cannot be denied to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, from the Indian Standards Institute and this certificate had been issued subject to condition that the goods shall be affixed with the brand name or trade name, that in terms of Apex Court s judgment in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Indore reported in 2005 (188) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), the benefit of SSI exemption would not be available to the goods affixed with the brand name or trade name of the customers who, instead of selling those goods, as such, used those goods in the manufacture of other goods, that the Tribunal in the case of Avadh Polytubes (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Kanpur reported in 2011 (268) E.L.T. 259 (Tri. Del.) has held that the pipes cleared by M/s Avadh Polytubes (P) Ltd. affixed with the brand name Bharti Airtel to M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. would not be eligible for SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/03-CE, that the ratio of the Tribunal s judgment in the case of Avadh Polytubes (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Kanpur (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, that the appellant had never disclosed to the department that the ceramic insulators being sold by them to M/s TDPL are being affixed with the brand name/trade name of M/s TDPL an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... practice under which the SSI units produce the castings as per the design supplied by the customers and such castings may bear the brand name/design/logo as required by the users of castings. Such castings are finally used in the manufacturer of other machinery like diesel engines. It has been represented that such castings are not traded as such in the open market and they are made for use by specific users. In such cases, the brand name which is put on the castings is the brand name of the machinery manufacturer, and thus putting the brand name is only to suit the manufacturing needs of the customer. Consequently, in such cases, the benefit of SSI exemption should not be denied . The above clarification has been issued with reference to the marks affixed on the castings. We find that the issue arising in the present case is identical but with reference to insulators. It cannot be stated that the mark TDPL is a brand name owned by M/s TDPL. An identical issue already stands decided in favour of the appellant in the case of Avinash Prefabs vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore (supra) wherein the Tribunal held as follows: 3. This appeal arises from Order-in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
