2017 (2) TMI 1032 - AT - Central Excise

SSI Exemption - clubbing of clearances - brand name of others - whether Tractor parts supplied to OEMs, on which stickers had been affixed, cleared by the respondents are branded goods or not? - Held that - Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has heavily relied upon the ratio decidendi in the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. 2005 (8) TMI 115 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA . Since the Revenue s grounds of appeal are based on non-applicability of the judgment of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. and the Board Circular dated 27.10.1994 and in view of the subsequent Board Circular accepting the said judgment and superseding the Circular dated 27.10.1994, we find that Revenue has no grounds to contest the impugned order - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether tractor parts supplied to OEMs, with affixed stickers, are considered branded goods for exemption under specific notifications.
2. Interpretation of Board Circulars dated 27.10.1994 and 01.09.2008 in the context of determining branded goods.

Analysis:
1. The case involved M/s Alfa Auto Industries (P) Ltd. availing exemption under Notification No. 9/2003-CE while supplying tractor parts to OEMs. The dispute arose regarding the classification of these parts as branded goods for exemption eligibility. The Adjudicating Authority issued show cause notices demanding duty and penalties, which were partly confirmed. The appeal focused on whether the tractor parts were rightfully considered branded goods, impacting the exemption limit.

2. The main issue revolved around whether the tractor parts supplied to OEMs, labeled with stickers, qualified as branded goods under the relevant notifications. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand related to branding of scrap but dropped the demand concerning suppliers to OEMs. The Revenue, dissatisfied with the decision, filed an appeal challenging the branding classification of the supplied tractor parts. The judgment analyzed the nature of the goods, emphasizing the distinction between branded and non-branded products for exemption purposes.

3. The Revenue's argument highlighted the significance of Board Circulars, specifically referring to Circular No. 71/71/94-CX dated 27.10.1994. However, it was noted that this circular had been superseded by a subsequent circular dated 01.09.2008, following the Supreme Court decision in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C.E, Indore. The judgment emphasized the applicability of the newer circular and the Supreme Court precedent, dismissing the Revenue's appeal based on the non-applicability of the earlier circular and the subsequent acceptance of the Supreme Court decision.

4. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue, citing the reliance on the judgment in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. and the subsequent Board Circular dated 01.09.2008. The decision affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, finding no grounds for the Revenue to contest the branding classification of the tractor parts supplied to OEMs. The judgment provided a clear interpretation of the legal framework surrounding branded goods and exemption eligibility under the relevant notifications.