1998 (6) TMI 378 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved: Determination of eligibility for small-scale exemption Notification No. 175/86-C.E. based on the use of a specific brand/logo on plywood products.

Facts: The appellants, engaged in plywood manufacturing, used the brand/logo "MERINO" along with their own brand "Pelican" on their products. Central Excise Officers seized plywood from their premises and from a trader's premises. The Commissioner held that the use of "MERINO" brand/logo made them ineligible for the exemption, leading to confiscation and penalties.

Arguments: Appellants argued that the use of "MERINO" did not imply a connection to the large-scale manufacturer. Departmental Representatives contended that the use of the brand/logo disentitled the appellants from the exemption, citing relevant legal precedents.

Analysis: The Tribunal examined the markings on the products and the definition of brand name/trade name as per Explanation VIII of the Notification. It was found that the appellants' brand "Pelican" was prominently displayed, while "MERINO" was used in a less prominent manner. The Tribunal concluded that the appellants' markings did not indicate a trade connection with the large-scale manufacturer, thus entitling them to the exemption.

Decision: The appeal of the first appellant was allowed, granting them the benefit of the notification. Consequently, the appeal of the second appellant, a trader, was also allowed. The impugned Order was set aside, providing relief to both appellants.