Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (1) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (1) TMI 557 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Central Excise Duty confirmation against the appellant.
2. Imposition of penalties on the company and director.
3. Trade mark registration dispute affecting SSI exemption eligibility.
4. Stay applications for waiver of pre-deposit conditions.

Central Excise Duty Confirmation and Penalties:
The appellants challenged the order confirming Central Excise Duty of Rs. 61,57,852 against them, along with penalties imposed. The jurisdictional Commissioner upheld the duty demand, interest, and penalties, alleging wrongful SSI exemption use under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. due to using a trade mark belonging to another entity, M/s. Mankoo International Industries. The appellants sought waiver of pre-deposit conditions under Section 35F to hear their appeals.

Trade Mark Dispute and SSI Exemption Eligibility:
The appellants argued that their continuous use of the 'Mankoo' trade mark since 1981, despite later registration by M/s. Mankoo International Industries in 2004, entitles them to the trade mark rights. Citing Trade and Merchandise Marks Act provisions and relevant case laws, they contended that registration does not override prior usage rights. The Supreme Court precedents highlighted the importance of actual use over registration for trade mark rights.

Waiver of Pre-Deposit Conditions:
The appellants presented a strong prima facie case asserting their right to the 'Mankoo' trade mark based on historical usage. The opposing party, however, argued against granting the stay applications, emphasizing the registered ownership of the trade mark by another entity. The Tribunal analyzed the trade mark laws and case laws to determine that the appellant's continuous use of the mark since 1981 established their vested rights, unaffected by subsequent registration.

Judgment and Stay Application Decision:
Considering the arguments and legal provisions, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, granting the stay applications and waiving the pre-deposit conditions for duty demand, interest, and penalties. The decision was influenced by the appellants' strong prima facie case, supported by legal precedents emphasizing actual usage rights over mere registration. The appeals were allowed to proceed, with the condition of pre-deposit being dispensed with and recovery stayed until further proceedings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates