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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai –IV Versus M/s Sams Techno Mech

2015 (12) TMI 1351 - CESTAT MUMBAI

SSI Exemption - Use of other's brand name - onus to prove that brand name not belong to any other person - Eligibility to avail benefit of small scale under Notification No. 8/2002 dated 1.3.2002 - Held that:- There is no dispute as to the fact that the respondents had produced metal label which is affixed on each and every machines and it is recorded by the first appellate authority that the name plate contains details, such as name of the manufacturer in full, name of the product, model, sr. 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

Sams Techno Mech and Sams Tool machine as the case may be. - If department wanted to deny the exemption notification on the ground that the brand name or their name is of another person, they must prove the case and the respondent cannot be asked to prove that trade name/brand name does not belong to any other person. We find that said metal label which was produced before us, creates an impression that the said machine is manufactured by SAMS Machine Tools or SAMS Techno Mech as the case 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

ommissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-IV. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved, in brief, in this case is regarding the eligibility to avail benefit of small scale under Notification No. 8/2002 dated 1.3.2002 for using the brand name of another person. The respondents herein were manufacturers of pharmaceutical machinery and were engaged in clearance of said machines. The lower authorities were of the view that the respondents were using the brand name &qu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

emption notification. 5. On perusal of the records, we find that there is no dispute as to the fact that the respondents had produced metal label which is affixed on each and every machines and it is recorded by the first appellate authority that the name plate contains details, such as name of the manufacturer in full, name of the product, model, sr. no. address, telephone no., fax no. and e.mail no. The first appellate authority has recorded the findings to the fact that there were no words or .....

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 if department wanted to deny the exemption notification on the ground that the brand name or their name is of another person, they must prove the case and the respondent cannot be asked to prove that trade name/brand name does not belong to any other person. We find that said metal label which was produced before us, creates an impression that the said machine is manufactured by SAMS Machine Tools or SAMS Techno Mech as the case may be. On such factual finding, we do find that the first appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ade name' of another person is used i.e. the goods bearing the 'brand name' or 'trade name' which belongs to some other person. It is immaterial whether such 'brand name' or 'trade name' is registered or not. However, Explanation IX gives a unique and particular definition to the term 'brand name' or 'trade name'. It is clear from the reading of the said explanation that the definition of 'brand name' or 'trade name' contained 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

Therefore, in order to qualify as 'brand name' or 'trade name' it has to be established that such a mark, symbol, design or name, etc. has acquired the reputation of the nature that one is able to associate the said mark, etc. with the manufacturer. We are supported in this view by series of judgments of this Court In Tarai Food Ltd. v. CCE, (2007) 12 SCC 721, the expression "brand name" was explained in the following terms: "7. The words brand name connotes such 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

 

 

 

 

 

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