1998 (7) TMI 268 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of exemption claimed under Notification No. 175/86 by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Ahmedabad.
2. Classification of goods manufactured by M/s. Suvik Electronics Pvt. Ltd. under Chapter 90 and Chapter 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.
3. Interpretation of the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 regarding the classification of goods under Class 9 and Class 10.
4. Ownership and use of the brand name "SUVIK" by Suvik Projects & Research Company Pvt. Ltd.
5. Admissibility of small scale industries exemption under Notification No. 175/86 for the appellants.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the denial of exemption under Notification No. 175/86 by the Commissioner. The appellants, M/s. Suvik Electronics Pvt. Ltd., were manufacturing medical instruments under Chapter 90 and Servo Regulators and UPS under Chapter 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Commissioner alleged a violation of the notification and denied the exemption. The appellants refuted the allegations, stating that their goods did not fall under Class 10 of the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The Commissioner based the denial on the ownership of the brand name "SUVIK" by Suvik Projects & Research Company Pvt. Ltd.

2. The advocates for the appellants argued that the Commissioner misdirected himself in passing the order. They contended that the goods in question belonged to Class 9 of the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, for which the appellants had filed an application for registration. They emphasized that the denial of the exemption under Notification No. 175/86 was legally incorrect.

3. The statement provided by Mr. Prabhandham Raghuram clarified the registration of the brand name "SUVIK" for goods falling under Class 9 of the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The Tribunal noted that the goods manufactured by the appellants did not fall under Class 10, as registered by Suvik Projects & Research Company Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's approach erroneous and allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order.

4. It was established that the goods produced by M/s. Suvik Electronics Pvt. Ltd. were classified under Class 9, not Class 10, of the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The ownership of the brand name "SUVIK" by another company for goods under Class 10 did not affect the appellants' eligibility for the small scale industries exemption under Notification No. 175/86. The Tribunal concluded that no violation of the notification was evident, leading to the allowance of the appeal and the overturning of the Commissioner's decision.