Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s The Hooghly Infrastructure Pvt Ltd And Others Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Others

2015 (10) TMI 1569 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Exemption to textile products - whether jute bags manufactured by the Appellant and classifiable under Chapter Heading 6305, printed with some particulars of other person, could be considered as bearing a brand name or sold under a brand name. - Denial of benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.7.2004 - whether the appellants are eligible to the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.7.2004 as amended by Notification No.12/2011-CE dated 01.3.2011 and Notification No.30/2011-CE dat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s name on the HDPE sacks/bags, would not come within the mischief of para 7 of the Notification No. 175/86-CE, accordingly, the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No.175/86 dated 1.3.1986 could not be denied to them. The reasoning and observation of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in this case was specifically overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd.'s case [2005 (8) TMI 115 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA].

On affixing the brand name/trade name of another pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat the goods manufactured need not be sold to the customers, but even if it is used captively by the person whose brand name has been used, the manufacturer would not be eligible to the benefit of the said notification. - undisputedly the appellants have affixed the names, logos and other particulars of another person i.e. FCI etc. to whom the bags are sold/cleared. Therefore, in our opinion, on affixing the particulars which have also been considered as branding by the jute commissioner, since .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iples of law settled by the courts and Tribunal on the issue and concluded that the benefit of the exemption notification is not admissible. - we set aside the impugned Order to the extent of imposition of penalty and also confirmation of the demands, wherever extended period of limitation has been invoked. In such cases, the duty however, should be computed for the normal period of limitation - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Appeal Nos. Ex.Ap. 70698/14 - Final Order Nos. A/75321-75354/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

LTD M/s AGARPARA JUTE MILLS LTD M/s AI CHAMPDANI INDUSTRIES LTD M/s KAMARHATTY CO LTD M/s THE NAIHATI JUTE MILLS CO LTD M/s NAFFAR CHANDRA JUTE MILLS LTD M/s JAGATDAL JUTE & INDUSTRIES LTD M/s TREND VYAPAAR LTD M/s THE RELIANCE JUTE MILLS INTERNATIONAL LTD M/s JAGATDAL JUTE & INDUSTRIES LTD M/s NAFFAR CHANDRA JUTE MILLS LTD M/s AI CHAMPDANI INDUSTRIES LTD M/s SUNBEAM VANIJYA PVT LTD M/s JANAKALYAN VINIMAY PVT LTD M/s AGARPARA JUTE MILLS LTD M/s NORTHBROOK JUTE CO LTD M/s ANGUS JUTE WORK .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

KOL-II (SL NO 31-32) For the Appellants : Shri Dr Samir Chakraborty, Sr. Adv. J P Khaitan, Sr. Adv. K P Dey, S Bagaria, P Banerjee, Adv., D K Saha, S P Siddhanta, Consultants For the Respondents : Shri D K Acharya, Spl Counsel, S Sharma, Commr(AR) ORDER Per: D M Misra: The aforesaid Appeals are directed against respective orders of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata. Since the issues involved are common, therefore, all these Appeals are taken up together for disposal. 2. Suffice it woul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

availing the benefit of exemption Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 as amended by Notification Nos.12/2011-CE dated 1.3.2011 & 30/2011CE dt.24.03.2011. Since the said Hessian Bags, Sacking Bags are printed with a brand name of those to whom the said goods were ultimately sold/supplied, therefore, the department considering this Hessian Bags, Sacking Bags as branded goods issued demand notice on 11.01.2013 denying the benefit of the said Notification. On adjudication, the ld. Commiss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Applicant M/s. Hooghly Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. submitted that while exercising powers conferred under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the Jute Control Order is passed empowering the Jute Commissioner to control amongst other things prices and production of raw jute and jute textiles. Exercising powers conferred by Clause 4 of the Jute Control Order, the Jute Commissioner issued specific orders during the material period directing the Appellant to produce specified categori .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t was mandatorily required to specify in each of the said jute bags, the name, monogram as well as marking specified therein and/or specified by DGS & D. Further, from time to time DGS & D issued requisition orders for supply of jute bags and it was effecting the purchase for and on behalf of various State Governments/State Government agencies viz. FCI and others. 5. It is his submission that as per the orders of the jute Commissioner, the colours, emblem, the name of the manufacturing m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er submission that there is no connection in the course of trade between the subject goods and either DGS & D or the concerned State Government/Govt. agencies or FCI. The jute bags manufactured are used for packing food grains which are later sold/distributed through public distribution system (PDS) and other welfare schemes for the weaker sections of the society. Thus, there is no promotion/marketing, whatsoever, and the marks/logos etc. cannot be considered affixing brand name, as commerci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

osed to the marking on the said jute bags nor the goods sold under any alleged 'brand name'. The buyers of the bags also have no choice to use the said bags for any other purpose or for sale for any other commodity. 6. The ld. Sr. Advocate referred to a letter dated 10.01.2014 of the Deputy Jute Commissioner on the subject of demand of excise duty pursuant to the budget 2010-11, wherein it is clarified that in the system of procurement of jute bags by the Government there is no contract .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t contain any brand name and cannot be treated as branded goods under the said Notification. It is his submission that the specification on the jute bags are not 'brand name' of either the appellant or its buyers. No connection can be drawn 'in the course of trade' between the product of the appellant or its buyer beyond the said markings on jute bags. The buyer's product are altogether different and no connection with the manufacturer and sale of the said goods. In support o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of Supreme Court in Arasmita Captive Power Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. Lafarge (India) Pvt.Ltd. 2013 (15) SCC 414 in support of his submission that the principle for understanding the ratio decidendi of a judgement has been emphasized in the said case at paragraph 33, 34 and 35 of the said judgement. It is his submission that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kohinoor Industries vs. CCE - 2005 (188) ELT 3(SC) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 8. The ld .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bands of underwear marked with the brand name under which the owner of the brand would be selling the underwear, although the said owner was not eligible to the benefit under the SSI Notification. It is the submission that no such case is involved in the present case. 9. Further, he has submitted that the quantification of duty demand is patently erroneous which is pointed out in reply to the show cause notice, but not considered by the adjudicating authority. It is his claim that on a correct .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

exempted after 01.03.2013. 10. Shri J.P. Khaitan, ld. sr. Advocate appearing for Naihati Jute Mills, AIR Champdani and Nafar Chand Jute Mills Ltd., besides supporting the submissions advanced by the ld. sr. Advocate Dr.Chakraborty, added that in respect of the appeals, namely, E/70791/13, 70886/13, 71001/13, 75351/14 & 75525/14, the grounds on which the demands were raised in the show cause notices and confirmed in the respective impugned Orders are diagonally opposite, hence, the impugned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

trade between such product and some person using the brand name. It is his contention that the brand name must be related to the product of chapter 63 and used for indicating connection in the course of trade between the chapter 63, and the person using the brand name. 12. Further, he has submitted that the name of the procurement agency and its emblem do not constitute a brand name in relation to the product of chapter 63, namely, jute sacks/ bags. The printing on the bags has to be viewed in i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/central Govt. involved in its distribution. Such agency admittedly does not trade in chapter 63 goods and the question of its having any brand name in relation to the goods of chapter 63 does not arise. There is no trade in the bags at the hands of the agency or even thereafter. It is submitted that particulars of the agricultural produce to be packed in the bags and those of the procurement agency of the Government involved in its distribution are not a brand name in relation to the bags class .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. (supra). Further, distinguishing the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kohinoor Elastic Pvt. Ltd.'s case the ld. sr. Advocate submitted that in the said judgement their Lordships dealt with the SSI exemption Notification No.01/93-CE dated 28.2.1993. It provides exemption to the specified goods mentioned in the annexure to the Notification and the exemption was not available to such specified goods bearing a brand name of another per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n Notification in order to prevent its abuse by large scale manufacturers who are not entitled to the benefit of said exemption. No such situation exist in the present case. The ld. Advocate referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Australian Foods India (P) Ltd.'s case and also the Circular of the Board No.947/8/2011 dated 21.2.2011 submitted that the exemption is admissible in the present case. Further he has submitted the demand in relation to Appeal No.E-7086/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ring for Appellant RDB Textiles. Also, he has submitted that a portion of the demand is barred by limitation. Shri K.P.Dey, for Trend Vyapaar Ltd. & others. Also subscribed to the above arguments of the senior advocates. Further he has submitted that in view of the Larger Bench decision in the case of M/s Prakash Industries vs. Commissioner - 2000 (119) ELT 30(Tri-LB), the demand is not sustainable. 16. Per contra, Shri D.K.Acharya, ld. spl. Counsel for the Revenue submitted that the present .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tory of the exemption Notification, the ld.spl. counsel has submitted that the principal Notification i.e. Notification No.30/04-CE dated 09.07.2004 was issued way back in 2004, whereby all goods under chapter 63 of CETA,1985 irrespective of branded or unbranded jute bags were exempted from payment of duty. The jute Commissioner, under Notification S.O. 174(E) dated 11.01.2011, inter alia, Stipulated that every bag is to be branded with monogram to be specified by DGS & D, Kolkata that the n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d goods continued to remain nonexempt. By virtue of a corrigendum dated 20.04.2011 exemption was restricted to the unlaminated jute bags under tariff heading 6305, apart from the unbranded ones. It is his contention that even when the Government of India corrected the Notification No.30/2011-CE dated 24.3.2011, included the jute bags under tariff heading 6305 (except laminated ones) into the exempted categories, however, did not bring back the branded ones also into the scope of exempted categor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the product and also some person using such name or mark with or without any indication of the identity of that person. He has submitted that the jute bags in the present case are branded with emblem/monogram of 'Food Corporation of India', 'Raipur Vipanan Sangha', Govt. of Punjab' etc. This is apart from the other identification colour scheme marks like single blue strip running along the length of the bags with additional identification markings of two consecutive blue wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

therein that the exemption contained in that Notification shall not apply to specified goods bearing brand name or trade name, registered or not of another person, but there are certain exceptions to the said condition also. For example, the specified goods even if bear brand name or trade name of i) Khadi & Village Industries Commission (KVIC) ii) State Khadi & Village Industry Board (SKVIB) iii) National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC) iv) State Small Industries Development Corpora .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

goods under Notification No.30/2011-CE dated 24.3.2011, similar provision allowing exemption to certain Government brands like Government of Punjab, FCI would have mentioned in the said Notification. It is his submission that if KVIC, SKVIV, NSIC, SSIDC and SSIC could be considered as brands in the same way 'FCI', 'Raipur Vipanan Sangha', Govt. of Punjab' are also to be considered as brands. These brands are engraved, woven, etched etc. in the jute bags and make them branded .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that a subsequent Notification No.11/2013-CE dated 01.3.2013 amending Notification No.30/2011-CE dated 24.3.2011 had exempted all goods under chapter 63 (with a few exceptions) and the result was that both branded and unbranded jute bags under chapter 63 became exempted from 01.3.2013 onwards. It is his submission that the period from 01.3.2011 to 01.3.2013 the branded jute bags were intended to be dutiable and not exempt as the Government did not bring any such changes even through the corrigen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me' in the present case when the jute Commissioner describes the jute bags in question as branded, when DGS & D (traders/procurers) provides them to print the brand of FCI, Raipur Vipanan Sangha, Govt. of Punjab etc. and when the Govt. of India issues Notification accordingly, then the inevitable conclusion is that the jute bags are not eligible to exemption and there is no necessity to refer any case laws on the subject. However, he referred to the case laws namely Commissioner of C.Ex. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

00 bags to be paid as extra in addition to the ex-factory prices. It is his submission that when the DGS & D itself acknowledges that the jute bags are branded and necessary branding charges are recovered from the customers, therefore, there is no room for any interpretation as to ascertain whether these jute bags are branded or otherwise. It is his submission that the eligibility to exemption Notification 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 as amended by Notification No.12/2011 CE & 30/2011 CE .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ic, once the brand name of another person is affixed on the jute bags or if it was sold under a brand name then the benefit of Notification is not available. Further, he has submitted that the Circular of the Board dated 21.6.2011 issued in the context of garments is not relevant to the present case and also such Circular is not binding on the Courts/Tribunal in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE-Bolpur vs. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries - 2008 (231) ELT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nts which are as below:- Textiles and Textile Articles - Effective rate of duty to specified goods of Chapters 50 to 63 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) read with sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (58 of 1957) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 7/2003-Central Exc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said Table, from whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the said Central Excise Act: Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to the goods in respect of which credit of duty on inputs or capital goods has been taken under the provisions of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002,- Table S. No. Chapter or heading No. or sub heading No. Description of goods (1) (2) (3) 1. 50.04, 50.05 All goods 2. 51.05, 5106.11, 5 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cture of yarns or textured yarn (including draw twisted and draw wound yarn) of heading 54.02 or 54.03. Explanation, - For the purposes of this exemption, "manufacture of yarns" means manufacture of filaments of organic polymers produced by processes, either: by polymerization of organic monomers, such as polyamides, polyesters, polyurethanes, or polyvinyl derivatives; or (b) by chemical transformation of natural organic polymers (for example cellulose, casein, proteins or algae), such .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or 55.04. Explanation. - For the purposes of this exemption, "manufacture of filament yarns, monofilaments, filament tows or staple fibres" means manufacture of filaments or staple fibres of organic polymers produced by processes, either: (a) by polymerization of organic monomers, such as polyamides, polyesters, polyurethanes, or polyvinyl derivatives; or (b) by chemical transformation of natural organic polymers (for example cellulose, casein, proteins or algae), such as viscose rayon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.90, 5805.90, 58.07, 5808.10) All goods 14. 59 (except 5907.30) All goods 15. 60 All goods 16. 61, 62, 63 (except 6307.10) All goods [Notification No. 30/2004-C.E., dated 9-7-2004] Textiles and Textile articles - Amendment to Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) read with sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special importance) Act, 1957 (58 of 1957), the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, the figures "2004" shall be substituted; (ii) in the TABLE, for S.No. 16 and the entries relating thereto, the following S.No. and entries shall be substituted, namely:- (1) (2) (3) "16. 61, 62 and 63( except 6309 00 00 and 6310) All goods, other than those bearing a brand name or sold under a brand name" [Notification No. 12/2011-C.E., dated 1-3-2011] Textile articles - Exemption to specified carpets, adhesive tapes and sacks & bags for packing, withdrawn - Amendment t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Revenue), No. 30/2004-Central Excise, dated the 9th July, 2004 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide G.S.R. 421(E), dated the 9th July, 2004, namely:- In the said notification,- (i) in the TABLE, for S.No. 12 and the entries relating thereto, the following S. No. and entries shall be substituted namely:- (1) (2) (3) "12. 57 All goods other than,- (i) Hand-made carpets, whether or not any machines have been used to achieve better finish during pre-weaving or post-weaving o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s, used independently by hand, such as hooking guns, tufting guns and knitted guns. (ii) in the TABLE, for S.No. 14 and the entries relating thereto, the following S.No. and entries shall be substituted, namely:- (1) (2) (3) "14. 59 (except 5906 10 00) All goods." (iii) in the TABLE, for S.No. 16 and the entries relating thereto, the following S.No. and entries shall be substituted, namely:- (1) (2) (3) "16. 61, 62 and 63 (except 6305, 6309 00 00 and 6310) All goods other than tho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the aforesaid Notifications, therefore, its meaning has to be understood as defined at chapter note (iv) of chapter 63 of CETA, 1985, which reads as under:- (iv) In relation to products of this Chapter, "brand name" means a brand name, whether registered or not, that is to say, a name or a mark, such as a symbol, monogram, label, signature or invented words or any writing which is used in relation to a product, for the purpose of indicating, or so as to indicate, a connection in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

isfy the meaning of 'brand name', prescribed at chapter note (iv) of chapter 63 of CETA, 1985, the appellant are not eligible to the benefit of exemption Notification No.30/2004 dated 09.07.2004 as amended by Notification No.12/2011-CE dated 01.3.2011 and 30/2011-CE dated 24.3.2011. 24. The main thrust of the appellant's argument on the other hand is that since this printing/writing on the jute bags have been carried out pursuant to the direction issued by the jute commissioner, bein .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the eligibility or otherwise of the benefit of the said exemption Notification, it is necessary to refer the principles governing the interpretation of an exemption notification. In a recent case, B.P.L Ltd. Vs. Commr. C.Ex., Cochin-II 2015 (315) ELT 556(SC), their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referring to the earlier decisions on the subject observed as: "18. We approve the aforesaid reasoning and rational given by the Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that the goods of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ciple was stated in the following manner: "16. Lastly, it is for the assessee to establish that the goods manufactured by him come within the ambit of the exemption notification. Since it is a case of exemption from duty, there is no question of any liberal construction to extend the term and the scope of the exemption notification. Such exemption notification must be strictly construed and the assessee should bring himself squarely within the ambit of the notification. No extended meaning .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

person who claims exemption or concession has to establish that he is entitled to that exemption or concession. A provision providing for an exemption, concession or exception, as the case may be, has to be construed strictly with certain exceptions depending upon the settings on which the provision has been placed in the Statute and the object and purpose to be achieved. If exemption is available on complying with certain conditions, the conditions have to be complied with. The mandatory requi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bility must establish clearly that he is covered by the said provisions and, in case of doubt or ambiguity, the benefit of it must go to the State. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Hansraj Gordhandas v. CCE and Customs (AIR 1970 SC 755 - (1996) 2 SCR 253, held that: "16.. such a notification has to be interpreted in the light of the words employed by it and not on any other basis. This was so held in the context of the principle that in a taxing statute, there is no room for any intend .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at whether the brand-name is affixed/printed voluntarily or under compulsion of law. 27. It is also argued on behalf of the Revenue that it is not the intention of the government to extend the exemption to the manufacturer's of Jute bags on affixing the logo and other particulars of user of the jute bags, who are state government/Central government undertakings like, Food Corporation of India(FCI) etc.. To buttress their aforesaid argument, the Revenue referred to and relied on the SSI exemp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facture of branded jute bags. Also, it is argued by the revenue that the jute bags are branded cannot be disputed by the appellants inasmuch as while calculating the price of the jute bags, branding charges @Rs.15/- per hundred bags, has been included in the cost of the jute bags. 28. In support of their respective arguments both sides have referred the following leading judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court viz. Tarai Food Ltd. Vs. CCE, 2006 (198) ELT 323(SC) (ii) CCE Vs. Grasim Industries .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ckets which contain the brand name of 'Inland Valley' were cleared on payment of duty under tariff heading No.2001.10 and the packets which did not contain the said name were cleared under tariff heading 2001.90 and no excise duty was paid. Interpreting the said entries their Lordship observed that the assessee should be allowed to avail the advantage of the brand name in its trade and if the assessee opts not to take advantage of the brand name in its trade, it could at least have the b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dated 02.6.1998. Interpreting the said notification, their Lordships observed that the assessee was using the name of other persons, hence, the cement cleared by them were not eligible to the benefit of the said Notification. Reading this judgement also, we do not find any support in applying the principles laid down therein to the facts of the present case. 31. In Australian Foods (India) Pvt.Ltd.'s case (supra) the question of law arose for consideration was whether the appellant therein a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unter of the same retail outlet. The question was whether these cookies sold in loose form from the said retail out let would be eligible to the SSI exemption. Their Lordships after examining the issue in detail observed that the cookies sold from the branded outlet would not be eligible for exemption under the SSI exemption notification as there is no requirement that the cookies should bear the brand name. This case also, in our opinion, do not lend much support to the Appellants case before u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ement of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Prakash Industries vs. Commissioner - 2000 (119) ELT 30(Tri-LB) involving facts more or less similar to the present one. Therefore, it is relevant to visit the facts of the Prakash Industries' case first before venturing to discuss the principle laid down in Kohinoor Synthetics' case. 33. The facts in issue in Prakash Industries' case was that the appellants therein were manufacturers of HDPE sacks solely for the supply to M/s Orissa Cemen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/86 dated 1.3.1986 could not be denied to them. The reasoning and observation of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in this case was specifically overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd.'s case. 34. In Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd.'s case, the appellant therein are manufacturer of elastics as per specific orders of their customers who are manufacturer of under-garments. As per the order of the customers, the appellants affixed brand/trade name, belonging to t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly to the specified goods, bearing a brand name or trade name (registered or not) of another person: Provided that nothing contained in this paragraph shall be applicable to the specified goods which are component parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances and cleared from a factory for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances and the procedure set out in Chapter X of the said Rules is followed: Explanation IX. - "Brand name" .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on 35. After a detailed deliberation on various aspects, their Lordships recorded the arguments and conclusions as follows:- "6 .Mr. V. Sridharan, learned Counsel for the Appellants placed strong reliance upon Explanation IX set out hereinabove. He submitted that the words "that is to say" qualify the words "Brand name" or "Trade name". He submitted that Explanation IX thus makes it clear that the brand name or the trade name must have been used so as to indica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

trade name has relevance only because the customer associates the product bearing the brand/trade name with a person. He submitted that in this case the customers associated the brand/trade names (used by the Appellants) not with the elastics (which never reached the market) but with undergarments manufactured by the Appellants customer. He submitted that the elastic manufactured by the Appellants was never sold in the market and was only supplied to the customer who so ordered it. He submitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. the undergarments and thus the customer only associates the brand/trade name with the undergarment and not with the elastics. He submitted that in such cases the exemption is not lost. 7. It is on just such a reasoning that the Full Bench of the Tribunal has held that the exemption is not lost. We are afraid that there is complete misreading and a misunderstanding of the Notification. As set out hereinabove, Clause 4 of the Notification is clear and unambiguous. It says that the exemption is l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

elastic)" which reach customers without any change in form. Clause 4 does not provide that the exemption will not be lost if the "goods (elastic)" are only used as inputs in the manufacture of other goods. Most importantly Clause 4 does not provide that exemption is not lost if the "goods (elastic)" are manufactured as per orders of a customer and for use only by that customer. Explanation IX nowhere detracts from this position. It is correct that the words "that is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ant, who is applying/affixing the brand/trade name on the goods. Thus the words "for the purpose of indicating" refers to the purpose of the manufacturer (Appellant). The "course of trade" is of that manufacturer and not the general course of trade. Even if a manufacturer only manufactures as per orders of customer and delivers only to that customer, the course of trade, for him is such manufacture and sale. In such cases it can hardly be argued that he has no trade. In fairn .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t;in the course of trade" of the manufacturer for the "purpose of indicating a connection between the goods and the customer who used the brand/trade name". Clearly in such a case the exemption is lost. Now in this case there is no dispute on facts. The "course of trade" of the Appellant is making elastics for specified customers. It is an admitted position that the Appellants are affixing the brand/trade name of their customers on the elastics. They are being so affixed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by him and the person using the brand/trade name, the exemption is lost. In any case it cannot be forgotten that the customer wants his brand/trade name affixed on the product not for his own knowledge or interest. The elastic supplied by the Appellants is becoming part and parcel of the undergarment. The customer is getting the brand/trade name affixed because he wants the ultimate customer to know that there is a connection between the product and him. Of course the intention of the custome .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

benefit cannot be given when it is clearly not available. 36. A plain reading of the aforesaid observation of their Lordships makes it clear that on affixing the brand name/trade name of another person, an assessee would be ineligible to avail the benefit of the exemption notification. It flows from the said observation that it is not necessary to examine the reason/cause for affixing the brand-name of another person. It is also clearly laid down that trade does not indicate a trade in its gener .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the present case for the reason that it has been delivered in the context of availing of the benefit under SSI exemption notification where the intention of the Government was not to allow the SSI benefit to be availed by large manufacturer in an oblique or indirect manner. We are not impressed with the said argument of the Advocates for the appellants inasmuch as the Notification in Kohinoor Elastics' case refers to the exemption from levy of excise duty on the goods manufactured and th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edly the appellants have affixed the names, logos and other particulars of another person i.e. FCI etc. to whom the bags are sold/cleared. Therefore, in our opinion, on affixing the particulars which have also been considered as branding by the jute commissioner, since branding charges are also included in the price of the jute bags, hence, it cannot be denied that the jute bags bear the brand name of another person and accordingly not eligible to the benefit of Notification No.12/2011-CE dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

djudicating authority has travelled beyond the scope of Show Cause Notice relating to Appeal Nos. E/70791/13, 70886/13, 71001/13, 75351/14 & 75525/14 in passing the impugned Order, hence it is bad in law. We find that the Show Cause Notices were issued proposing denial of the benefit of the exemption Notifications, which have been adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner on the basis of a fair interpretation of the Notifications and the principles of law settled by the courts and Tribunal on the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version