2023 (12) TMI 1105 - AT - Central Excise

Wrongful availment of SSI Exemption - use of brand name BASANT owned by another person - BASANT is the name inherited by both BMW and the appellant - whether the use of the brand name BASANT-KS by suffixing the letters KS (abbreviation for Kanwarjit Singh, Partner of the appellant firm) to the inherited name BASANT is entirely fortuitous and is not a case of use of brand name belonging to the other person? HELD THAT - On an identical issue regarding the brand name BASANT this Tribunal in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ST, LUDHIANA VERSUS M/S. BASANT PRESSES (INDIA) 2017 (6) TMI 805 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH had held that the trademark BASANT was being used by BMW and the same even if used by M/s Basant Presses (India), they were still eligible for SSI exemption. The impugned order denying the benefit of SSI exemption is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the eligibility of the appellant for SSI exemption based on the use of the brand name 'BASANT-KS' in the manufacturing of power presses, the ownership of the brand name 'BASANT', and the applicability of relevant judicial precedents in determining the duty demand.

Eligibility for SSI exemption:
The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing power presses, was under scrutiny for availing SSI exemption by using the brand name 'BASANT-KS'. A search revealed that the brand name 'BASANT' was registered in the name of another entity, M/s Basant Mechanical Works (BMW). The appellant argued that the use of 'BASANT-KS' was fortuitous and not a case of using another person's brand name. The original authority supported the appellant's claim, citing previous decisions. However, the department challenged this decision, leading to an appeal.

Ownership of brand name 'BASANT':
The department contended that the appellant was not the legal owner of the brand name 'BASANT', which was registered under M/s BMW. The use of 'BASANT-KS' was seen as an attempt to exploit the goodwill associated with the 'BASANT' brand. The department emphasized that the suffix 'KS' was merely an abbreviation of the partner's name and did not change the fact that the goods were sold under the 'BASANT' brand.

Applicability of judicial precedents:
The appellant cited previous tribunal decisions in similar cases where the use of the 'BASANT' brand name was upheld for SSI exemption. The appellant provided evidence of familial connections to the original manufacturer of power presses under the 'BASANT' name. The department, however, relied on various cases to support its argument that the appellant was not entitled to SSI exemption due to the use of the 'BASANT-KS' brand name.

Judgment:
After considering the arguments and reviewing the precedents, the tribunal found that previous decisions supported the appellant's eligibility for SSI exemption despite using the 'BASANT-KS' brand name. The tribunal referenced specific cases where similar issues were resolved in favor of the appellants. Consequently, the impugned order denying the SSI exemption was set aside, and both appeals of the appellant were allowed with consequential relief, if any.