TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h either bear or are marketed and sold under a brand name attract this levy. Whether a particular name or mark or symbol etc. is a brand name or not is a matter of fact, and can be ascertained from the manner in which it is understood in commercial or trade parlance. The test of goods being branded would be if the buyer seeks to buy the goods because they bear or are sold under a particular brand. As such, a mere mark of identity put by a jeweller or the job worker, commonly known as a ‘house mark’ shall not be considered a brand name.” In the case the medallions of gold/silver only the house mark “MMTC Logo” is applied on the articles. The brand name “Sanchi” is not appearing either on the articles or packing. Hence, Central Excise duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he department has demanded 1% duty on the articles made by the appellant. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed the present appeals. 3. With this background, we heard Shri Amit Jain, learned Counsel. He submits that appellant has a trade mark known as Sanchi but same was not used for the coins. Even for the articles, it was used only in the packing box. Sanchi Trade Mark is not printed on the articles. He submits that MMTC is a logo of MMTC Ltd. which is printed on the coins as well as articles, that gives guarantee of purity and weight. But the same logo is not registered with patent authorities as a brand name. This is a house mark and no other person can use this house mark except the appellant who is using the same not only on a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut as per Chartered Accountant certificate it is ₹ 556 crore. He made a request for rectification of this mistake. Lastly, he requested to set aside the impugned order. He also submits that the demand is time barred. 6. Learned Counsel submits that as per notification No. 05/06 dated 1.3.2006, no duty is leviable. But fact remains that as per notification No. 1/2011 dated 1.3.2011, 1% levy is the matter of dispute before us. 7. On the other hand, Shri S K Bansal, learned DR submits that appellant has sought the registration of the brand name of Sanchi . The appellant has collected the excise duty and deposited as discussed in page 208 of the impugned order. In this context, he submits that Shri D K Seth, Deputy General Manager, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is used which is invariably a word or combination of word and letter or numeral by which the product is identified and asked for. It was also stated that in respect of all products both the Product mark and Brand name would appear side by side on all the labels, cartons etc. and that the House mark is used generally as an emblem of the manufacturer projecting the image of the manufacturer, whereas Brand name is a name or trade mark either unregistered or registered under the Act. 34 . Therefore, it is not necessary that Brand name should be compulsorily registered. A person can carry on his trade by using a Brand name which is not even registered. But in violation/infringement of trade mark, remedy available would be di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued at the time of introduction of 1% duty, it has been clarified that, only such jewellery or other articles of precious metals which either bear or are marketed and sold under a brand name attract this levy. Whether a particular name or mark or symbol etc. is a brand name or not is a matter of fact, and can be ascertained from the manner in which it is understood in commercial or trade parlance. The test of goods being branded would be if the buyer seeks to buy the goods because they bear or are sold under a particular brand. As such, a mere mark of identity put by a jeweller or the job worker, commonly known as a house mark shall not be considered a brand name. The above clarification shows that only such jewellery or other ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
