9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 241 - AT - Central ExciseSSI Exemption - use of Brand Name of others - it was alleged that brand name of Le Royal Meridien which is owned by Star Wood Hotels and Resorts Ltd. for clearance of cakes cookies and pastries - N/N. 8/2003-CE dated 1.3.2003 - Held that - The appellants have entered into an agreement with Meridien SA dated 12.4.2000 by which they have acquired the brand name Le Royal Meridien . They have been given the exclusive right to use the brand name till the expiry of the agreement. Therefore it cannot be said that they are using the trademark of another person. This issue was considered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Otto Bilz (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (10) TMI 2149 - SUPREME COURT wherein the foreign brand name owner when had assigned the trademark to the Indian company under an agreement with the right to use the trademark exclusively in India the Hon ble Court held that the Indian company is entitled to SSI exemption. The denial of SSI exemption is without any basis - penalty imposed on Managing Director of M/s. Appu Hotels Ltd. is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Applicability of SSI exemption benefit under Notification No. 8/2003-CE to the appellants using the brand name of "Le Royal Meridien" owned by another entity. Analysis: The case involved the appellants engaged in the manufacture of cakes and cookies, availing SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE. The department alleged that the appellants used the brand name "Le Royal Meridien," owned by "Star Wood Hotels and Resorts Ltd.," rendering them ineligible for the exemption. The original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the denial of the benefit, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel argued that the appellants were licensed to use the brand name "Le Royal Meridien" under an agreement with Star Wood Hotels and Resorts Ltd. The brand name was printed only on the carton, not on the products themselves. Citing a relevant precedent, the counsel contended that the appellants, having legal permission to use the brand name, should be eligible for the SSI exemption. On the other hand, the department's representative reiterated that the appellants had not proven authorization to use the brand name from the foreign company owning it. Thus, they were deemed to use another person's brand name, disqualifying them from the SSI exemption. The Tribunal referred to the definition of "brand name" under Notification No. 8/2003-CE and noted that the appellants had acquired the brand name "Le Royal Meridien" through an agreement with Meridien SA, granting them exclusive usage rights until the agreement's expiry. Drawing parallels with a Supreme Court ruling in a similar case, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants, having obtained the brand name legally, were entitled to the SSI exemption. Based on the precedent and the agreement allowing the use of the brand name, the Tribunal found the denial of the SSI exemption baseless. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the Managing Director of the appellants was set aside, and the impugned orders were overturned, allowing both appeals with any consequential relief. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the legal intricacies surrounding the use of brand names and their impact on eligibility for tax exemptions, emphasizing the importance of legal agreements in determining rights to brand usage.
|
