2008 (4) TMI 164 - AT - Central Excise

Respondents joint venture company jointly promoted by some foreign & Indian companies - SSI benefit u/not. 38/97 in respect of their water meters marked with the brand name Anand ZENNER product bear brand name as one word each from names of foreign & Indian companies - so ANAND ZENNER is only respondents housemark - To say that the buyers would see a connection between the respondents product and foreign company is only a figment of imagination - SSI benefit not deniable

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility for SSI benefit under Notifications No. 38/97-C.E. and No. 9/98-CE.
2. Interpretation of brandname/trade name under para-2(b) of SSI Notification No. 5/98-C.E.
3. Connection between product and manufacturer based on brandname.
4. Applicability of previous court judgments on the case.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of M/s. Anand Zenner Company Pvt. Ltd. for availing the SSI benefit under Notifications No. 38/97-C.E. and No. 9/98-CE. The department issued show-cause notices proposing to deny the benefit due to the use of the brandname "Anand ZENNER" on their water meters.

2. The main contention revolved around the interpretation of brandname/trade name under para-2(b) of SSI Notification No. 5/98-C.E. The appellant argued that the use of the word "ZENNER" established a relationship with the German company, thus making the SSI benefit inapplicable. Reference was made to a previous apex court judgment regarding a similar issue with cement labeling.

3. The Tribunal examined the display of the words "ANAND ZENNER" on the product and concluded that both words were part of the respondent's name. It was determined that buyers would associate the product with the manufacturer based on the combined brandname "ANAND ZENNER," considering it as the respondent's housemark. The Tribunal dismissed the notion of a connection between the product and the German company.

4. In considering the applicability of previous court judgments, the Tribunal found that the circumstances in the present case were distinct. It was held that the subject goods were not cleared under the brandname or trade name of another person, thus upholding the lower appellate authority's decision to allow the SSI benefit to the respondents. The Revenue's appeal was consequently dismissed.

The judgment was delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, with detailed reasoning provided for each issue raised, ultimately affirming the eligibility of M/s. Anand Zenner Company Pvt. Ltd. for the SSI benefit based on the interpretation of the brandname and the perceived connection between the product and its manufacturer.