GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (6) TMI 805 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

2017 (6) TMI 805 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH - TMI - SSI exemption - use of brand name of others - N/N. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 - Revenue was of the view that trade mark Basant is owned by M/s. Basant Mechanical Works, Ludhiana and the respondent is not entitled to used the brand name of other firm if they are availing benefit of SSI N/N. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 - Held that: - the respondent is a proprietary ship concern, who is using the brand name of a partnership concern, where the proprietor 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

- Dated:- 9-6-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri G.M. Sharma, AR for the Appellant - Revenue Shri Vikrant Kackria, advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the adjudicating authority granted benefit of SSI Exemption Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 to the respondent. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of Power Press and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imposing penalty. The adjudicating authority examined the issue in detail and by observing that brand name Basant is owned by M/s. Basant Mechanical Works where the proprietor of the respondent firm is a partner. Therefore, in that circumstance, he observed that the respondent is not using the brand name of others and relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Elex Industries vs. CCE, Chandigarh 2003 (158) ELT 602 (Tri. Del.) allowed the benefit of exemption notification. Aggrieved .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xy Sanitarywares (P) Limited vs. CCE Rajkot 2005 (189) ELT 162 (Tri. Mumbai) and Royal Springs vs. CCE, New Delhi 2002 (146) ELT 571 (Tri. Delh) which has been affirmed by the Hon ble Apex Court reported as 203 (152) ELT A263 (SC). 4. On the other hand, contention of the ld. AR is strongly opposed by the ld. Counsel. He submits that in the case of Elex Industries (supra), similar issue has been decided by the Tribunal and in that case, the proprietor of the firm was Director in the other firm wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Products (I) Pvt. Ltd vs. CCE & Cus. Delhi 2016 (343) ELT 689 (Tri. Del.), this Tribunal again held that such circumstance, SSI exemption cannot be denied. Further, he also relied on the decision in the case of CCE & ST, Indore vs. Sanjay Agarwal 2017 (345) ELT 568 (Tri. Del.), wherein this Tribunal held that benefit of exemption cannot be denied when the brand name is registered in the name of Managing Director who was earlier using the same for the goods manufactured by him as proprie .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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