2017 (6) TMI 313 - AT - Central Excise

SSI exemption - use of brand name of third party - unregistered trade mark - The Trade Mark authorities in the year 2001 refused to register the word CHAMRIA as a Trade Mark by observing that it is a surname and the same cannot be registered as a Trade Mark and is free for all to use - Held that - the word CHAMRIA is being used as a Trade Mark by the assessee-Appellants since the origin of the business in Rajasthan. One of the brothers has established the unit with the same brand name in Delhi, who is the assessee-Appellants in the present case. Thus, the assessee-Appellants are entitled to use the Trade Mark CHAMRIA which was originally belongs to them since the inception of business in Rajasthan, especially when it is free to all - reliance placed in the case of Kali Areated Water Works vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Madura 2015 (6) TMI 226 - SUPREME COURT - the assessee-Appellants are entitled for the SSI exemption under N/N. 1/1993 dated 28.02.1993 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over SSI exemption for the period 01.06.1995 to 31.03.2000.
2. Ownership and use of the Trade Mark "CHAMRIA" by the assessee-Appellants.
3. Interpretation of Trade Mark rights based on previous Tribunal decisions and Supreme Court judgments.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise denying SSI exemption for the mentioned period. The firm in question, dissolved in 1979, had two partners operating in different regions. The dispute arose regarding the use of the Trade Mark "CHAMRIA" on ayurvedic products, particularly "CRORPATI GOLI." The Tribunal had dealt with the issue twice before, leading to the current appeal.

2. The counsel for the assessee-Appellants argued that they were legitimate owners of the Trade Mark "CHAMRIA," even though it was not registered, and fell within the SSI exemption limit. The Department, represented by the learned DR, supported the impugned order. The Tribunal found that "CHAMRIA" had been used as a Trade Mark by the assessee-Appellants since the business's inception in Rajasthan, entitling them to its use, especially since it was free for all.

3. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the Tribunal highlighted the importance of recognizing individual proprietary rights over Trade Marks within specified marketing areas. Citing another Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee-Appellants were entitled to use the Trade Mark "CHAMRIA" on their products, including "KARORPATI GOLI." Relying on the Supreme Court's precedent, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the assessee-Appellants the SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/1993.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented, and the Tribunal's decision based on legal precedents and interpretations.