TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s settled position in law, the appellant is eligible for concessional rate of duty under various notifications. - Decided against the Revenue - APPEAL NO: E/220/2007 - A/86977/16/EB - Dated:- 8-10-2015 - Shri M V Ravindran and Shri C J Mathew, JJ. For The Appellant : Shri Ashuthosh Nath, Commissioner (AR) For The Respondent : hri S.P. Mathew, Advocate Per: C J Mathew: This appeal has been directed against order-in-appeal no: PII/BKS/291/2006 dated 26th October 2006 in which the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune - II has set aside the order of Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - II confirming duty demand of ₹ 27,77,573/- along with interest and invoking penalties. 2. It would appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to claim the benefit under the notification. That is the law laid down in clear words by the Apex Court in Bhalla Enterprises and reiterated in Meghraj Biscuits Inds. Ltd. case. 22. As regards the registration of brand name, the same does not disclose the appellants to be the exclusive owner of the brand name or trade name, rather it discloses that the appellant to be subsequent proprietor and that too on the basis of assignment deed. In the absence of the appellant being exclusive proprietor of the brand name and trade name and there is a clear admission that M/s. United Cocks Pvt. Ltd. were the original owners, use of the brand name GURU by the appellant would continue to be a use of a brand name of another person. Being so that wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit of concessional rate of duty. Likewise, the reliance placed upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore v. Vetcare Organics P. Ltd. [2015 (321) ELT 384 (SC)] does not have application to the facts in the present case as that decision is rendered in the context of a clear finding that a permission does not suffice to transfer temporary ownership of brand name. In the present instance it is clear that there is an assignment of the brand name of CMS under a deal for a fixed period. It is also clear that the products of the respondent are in no way connected to the products manufactured by the assignor of the brand name. 6. Consequently, in view of the settled position in law, cited supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
