Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1999 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1999 (9) TMI 243 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. 2. Ownership of the brand name "Kwality" and its registration. 3. Consideration of evidence for eligibility as an SSI unit. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E.: The appellants, who manufacture "Kwality Brand Ice Cream," claimed SSI exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. The Collector (A) held them ineligible for the exemption as they failed to provide evidence regarding the ownership of the brand "Kwality" or that the turnover of the company was less than 200 lacs per annum. This decision was based on a previous order-in-appeal involving a similar issue with Ghai Ice Cream Pvt. Ltd. The appellants challenged this decision through an appeal. Ownership of the brand name "Kwality" and its registration: The appellants contended that they had been using the brand name "Kwality" for over 25 years and argued that it could not be registered as it did not belong to any specific individual or industrial group. They claimed that the brand name was theirs and should be considered their own. The lower authorities denied them the benefit based on these claims. Consideration of evidence for eligibility as an SSI unit: During the appeal, the appellants argued that the "Kwality" brand name was used by multiple ice cream manufacturers and was not a registered trademark of any individual. They referred to a previous judgment where the Tribunal had granted a stay and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The Judicial Member noted that a similar issue had been dealt with in a previous case involving Ghai Ice Cream, where fresh evidence was considered for readjudication. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the Collector for reevaluation based on the evidence presented by the appellants, similar to the Ghai Ice Cream case. Consequently, the appeal was allowed by way of remand. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E., ownership of the brand name "Kwality," and the consideration of evidence for determining eligibility as an SSI unit. The decision to remand the matter for reevaluation based on fresh evidence showcases the importance of providing adequate proof in such cases to establish eligibility for exemptions under relevant notifications.
|