Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 358 - AT - Central ExciseSSI Exemption - use of brand name/trade name of others - HELD THAT:- A plain reading of Brand Name” or “Trade Name” are explained under Notification No.08/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 indicates that the “brand name” may or may not be registered and that it should indicate a connection between the owner and the product in course of the trade. In the instant case, the brand “Mankoo” is understandably a family surname which is affixed to their products. The family business started in 1971. Even after the three companies formed in 1981 after the demise of the founder, all the companies have been using the same brand name albeit with some negligible differences. There was no complaint, whatsoever, by the so-called registered owner of the brand i.e. “Mankoo International Limited” against the other two companies for using the said brand. Understandably, the families understand that the brand belongs to the family and not to any individual. This Bench has decided the issue in their own family group case on the use of same brand. This Bench relied upon the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-II VERSUS M/S. PETHE BRAKE MOTORS PVT. LTD. [2015 (5) TMI 491 - SC ORDER] where in the Apex Court has observed that the respondent/assessee therein was not using the brand name of another person and the name used was the surname of the Director of the assessee viz. Pethe and therefore, such usage does not come under the exceptions for availment of benefit of SSI exemption - the case laws relied upon by the Department are not applicable as the facts of the cases are different. Appeal allowed.
|