2004 (9) TMI 439 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Claim of small-scale exemption based on the use of a house-mark 'centaur' on medicines.

Analysis:
The appellants manufactured various P or P medicines such as Ocupol, Ocupol-D, Cipro-Cent, etc., using the name 'centaur' on the packings, claiming it to be a house-mark and not a brand name. They argued that the house-mark was assigned to them as per an agreement, justifying their entitlement to the small-scale exemption. The learned Advocate for the appellants cited several decisions in support of their claim, emphasizing the distinction between a house-mark and a brand name.

On the other hand, the department, represented by the learned S.D.R., supported the impugned order and relied on specific decisions to counter the appellant's claim. After hearing both sides and examining the case records and cited case laws, the Tribunal observed that while the individual medicines were marketed under different brand names, the mark 'centaur' was common to all the medicines. Referring to the Apex Court decision in Astra Pharmaceuticals, the Tribunal concluded that 'centaur' was a house mark and did not establish a direct relationship with the medicines.

Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the definitions of 'brand name' and 'trade mark' were crucial for classifying P or P medicines under the small-scale exemption notification. Consequently, the mark 'centaur' could not be considered a brand name or trade mark for the purpose of small-scale exemption. Drawing parallels with a similar decision in the case of Sanghi Threads, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellants and holding that they were not to be denied the small-scale exemption for using the house-mark 'centaur' on the manufactured medicines.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, affirming the appellants' entitlement to the small-scale exemption based on the usage of the house-mark 'centaur' on the P or P medicines they produced.