2007 (5) TMI 85 - AT - Central Excise

Issues involved:
Eligibility of SSI exemption for products affixed by trade name.

Analysis:
1. The issue at hand revolves around the eligibility of Small Scale Industry (SSI) exemption for the appellant concerning products affixed by trade names. The Hon'ble Supreme Court remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision on the eligibility of the appellant to benefit from the notification for unregistered products named Amigen, Sorgen, and Sigum. The primary focus is on whether these products bear brand names or trade names.

2. The appellant's advocate argues that the products in question are trade names, not specific brands, as they are advertised in trade magazines under those names. Additionally, it is highlighted that M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. has not used these trade names for 15 years, indicating their general nature due to non-use over time.

3. On the contrary, the Senior Departmental Representative (SDR) contends that the products Amigen, Sorgen, and Sigum are also manufactured and cleared by M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd., who have filed classification lists for the same products under their brand/trade names, citing a relevant Supreme Court decision.

4. The Tribunal carefully considers the submissions and evidence presented. The affidavit of Shri Nemichandra Mudya, a senior manager at M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd., reveals that the company had abandoned the trade names in question and was aware of the appellant's use of these names. The Tribunal finds merit in the appellant's argument that non-use by M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. has diluted the exclusivity of the trade names, citing relevant legal precedents.

5. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal emphasizes that the appellant may be entitled to the exemption if there was no intention to indicate a connection with another's goods. The SDR's argument based on M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd.'s classification lists is deemed inconclusive without evidence to counter the affidavit.

6. Consequently, the Tribunal rules in favor of the appellant, stating that the trade names Amigen, Sorgen, and Sigum do not belong to any specific entity, including M/s. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. Therefore, the denial of SSI exemption to the appellant for these products is set aside, and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved and the Tribunal's reasoning in deciding the eligibility of SSI exemption for products affixed by trade names.