2004 (2) TMI 464 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the respondents were clearing goods bearing the brand name of another unit.

Analysis:
The appeal involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of M/s. Hira Cement for the Small Scale Industries (SSI) Exemption. The Revenue contended that M/s. Hira Cement was using the brand name and trade name of M/s. Hira Industries Ltd., thus disqualifying them from the SSI Exemption. The Revenue argued that the logos, styles, and other details on the packaging of both entities were identical, creating a connection between the two. The Revenue also highlighted previous decisions to support their claim.

On the other hand, the Respondent argued that the brand name used by M/s. Hira Cement was "BBC Cement," distinct from the brand name of M/s. Hira Industries Ltd., which was "HIRA CEMENT." The Respondent emphasized that merely having similar logos did not imply the use of another company's brand name. The Respondent relied on legal precedents where a difference in brand names was considered sufficient for SSI Exemption eligibility. Additionally, the Respondent contested the Revenue's claim of related persons, asserting that the units' separate existence was established.

The Tribunal analyzed the brand names and logos used by both parties. It was observed that M/s. Hira Cement's brand name was "BBC Cement," while M/s. Hira Industries Ltd. used "HIRA CEMENT." Despite similar logos, the Tribunal concluded that the brand names were distinct. The Tribunal referenced legal precedents where differences in brand names were upheld for SSI Exemption. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument of related persons, emphasizing that the lack of evidence and the distinct brand names supported M/s. Hira Cement's eligibility for the SSI Exemption. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.