9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (for the Bench)]. - These appeals are against orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding the products in question to be not dutiable. The products are pharmacopoeial medicines. The appellants in Appeal No. 1258/1999 had printed the words 'BROWN & BURK', 'ELBE', LUEX', 'PREMIER HEALTH CARE', 'MORNING SIDE', etc. on the containers of their products. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tation for the appellants despite notice. These appeals had arisen before the Bench in the last week also, but there was no representation for the party. We are not inclined to keep these old appeals of the year 1999 pending any longer. Accordingly, we have examined the records and heard learned SDR. It is submitted by learned SDR that the words 'BROWN & BURK', being a part of the name of the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een said that the relationship between the medicine and the manufacturer was established. Learned SDR has heavily relied on this observation of the Apex Court, in support of the appellate Commissioner's order which inter alia says that the medicines has not been described as 'ELBE Paracetamol','LUEX Mebendazole', 'MORNING SIDE Vitamin B' and the like. Alter considering the submissions and reading ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above Act in respect of the respective medicines. Thus, none of the marks is a trademark or brand name, whether they are house marks or not. In the result, the orders of the appellate Commissioner holding the subject goods to be exempt from payment of duty, thereby rendering the appellants liable to honour the demand raised by the department under Rule 57CC require to be sustained. Accordingly, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
