2017 (3) TMI 1281 - AT - Central Excise

SSI exemption - use of brand name of others - The Department was of the view that since the appellant was clearing those goods with brand name of M/s Dabur India Ltd. they were not entitled to the benefit of SSI exemption under N/N. 8/2003-CE dated 1.3.2003 - N/N. 47/2008-CE, dated 01.9.2008 - Held that - N/N. 24/2009-CE (N.T.) dated 21.10.2009 clarified that brand name used on packaging material supplied to the person owning the brand name, would not be the basis for denial of SSI exemption to the manufacturer of said final products - absolutely there is no justification in upholding the demand on the goods manufactured by the appellant i.e. PP Caps with brand name Dabur and will be clearly eligible for the benefit of SSI Notification, subject to fulfillment of other conditions specified therein - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Denial of SSI exemption based on brand name usage on goods cleared to another company.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against a previous order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Indore. The dispute revolved around M/s Burplast Packaging Pvt. Ltd., engaged in manufacturing plastic products, clearing goods to M/s Dabur India Limited with the "Dabur" brand name. The Revenue contended that using the brand name of Dabur India Ltd. made them ineligible for the SSI exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE. A show cause notice was issued, demanding payment and imposing penalties on the company and its Director. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 30.3.2012.

The appellant argued that the denial of SSI exemption was incorrect, citing Notification No. 24/2009-CE (N.T.) dated 21.10.2009, which clarified that using a brand name on packaging material supplied to the brand owner would not disqualify the manufacturer from the SSI exemption. The Tribunal examined the relevant notifications, including Notification No. 24/2009-CE and Notification No. 47/2008-CE, both amending the SSI Notification No. 8/2003-CE. The Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for upholding the demand on goods like PP Caps with the "Dabur" brand name, as they were eligible for the SSI Notification benefits, subject to meeting other specified conditions.

In light of the retrospective amendments to the SSI Notification, covering the period from 01.10.1987 to 01.09.2008, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed both appeals in favor of the appellant. The decision provided consequential benefits to the appellant, if any. The judgment was delivered by Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI.