2001 (4) TMI 660 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of SSI Notification based on the use of a foreign unit's logo.
2. Time-barring of the demand raised by show cause notice.
3. Dispute regarding the use of the foreign company's logo and its impact on SSI exemption eligibility.

Entitlement to Benefit of SSI Notification:
The appeal stemmed from Order-in-Original No. 13/95, where the demand was confirmed due to the appellants using a foreign unit's logo, leading to a denial of the SSI Notification benefit. The appellants argued that they had no trade connection with the foreign brand and were deceptively dissimilar. Citing precedents like Rukmani Pakkwell Traders and Union of India v. Pillaiyar Soda Factory, the appellants sought relief. The Commissioner noted the relationship with the foreign company and identified the logo's association with the English company's product, thus rejecting the SSI exemption claim. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a re-examination based on precedents and remanded the case for reconsideration, setting aside the impugned order.

Time-Barring of Demand:
The appellants contended that the demand raised by the show cause notice was time-barred, lacking suppression, a point not fully addressed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal acknowledged this argument and directed the original adjudicating authority to consider the time-barring aspect during de novo proceedings.

Dispute Regarding Foreign Company's Logo:
The dispute revolved around the use of the foreign company's logo by the appellants. While the appellants asserted dissimilarity and lack of connection, the Department highlighted the common logo with minor variations, emphasizing the identification of the product with the English company. The Tribunal stressed the need for a thorough analysis of explanation IX and X of the Notification, along with relevant judgments, and remanded the matter for re-examination to determine SSI exemption eligibility based on the logo usage within the course of trade.

In conclusion, the Tribunal remanded the case for de novo consideration to assess the SSI Notification benefit entitlement, address the time-barring issue, and analyze the impact of using the foreign company's logo on eligibility, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review based on legal precedents and Notification provisions.