2004 (8) TMI 470 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Denial of SSI exemption benefit under Notification No. 1/93 due to alleged use of brand names 'Philco', 'Windsor and Wilson' on pressure cookers by the appellants.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi pertained to the denial of the SSI exemption benefit under Notification No. 1/93 to the appellants based on the use of brand names 'Philco', 'Windsor and Wilson' on their pressure cookers. The department relied on the testimony of Shri M.L. Ahuja to support the allegation. However, upon examination of the records, it was found that the appellants were manufacturing pressure cookers under their own brand name 'Windsor', with no concrete evidence to establish ownership of this brand name by any other entity.

Further scrutiny revealed a lack of tangible evidence to prove that the appellants used the brand names 'Philco', 'Windsor and Wilson' on their products. The lower authorities incorrectly interpreted Shri M.L. Ahuja's statement, where he clarified that the appellants used the brand name 'Windsor' while 'Philco' was associated with a different firm engaged in utensil manufacturing. The absence of supporting evidence from the department regarding the usage of 'Philco' by the appellants on their pressure cookers further weakened the case against them.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there was no violation of the conditions of the SSI exemption Notification No. 1/93 by the appellants, warranting the reversal of the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals). The decision favored the appellants, allowing their appeal and potentially entitling them to consequential relief as per the applicable laws.