9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (1) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... products. On 6 products, they affixed the brand name of M/s. Indoco, who are the distributors of pharmaceutical products, with their own name and cleared the products on payment of duty. On 24 other products manufactured by them, they availed the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. On 18 products, where the brand names were owned by them, the fact that the pharmaceuticals were manufactured by them, was prominently shown in the labels. The medicaments were marketed by M/s. Indoco. However, no brand name of M/s. Indoco was affixed on such labels. In the case of other six products, on the labels, the name and logo of the present appellants as well as of the distributors were displayed. Two show cause notices were issued for two different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals before us. 3. Shri Nankani, the ld. Advocate placed reliance on the Tribunal judgment in the case of Palsons Drugs Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CCE Calcutta - 1998 (98) E.L.T. 665 (T) = 1998 (74) ECR 607 as also in the case of Nippa Chemicals v. CCE, Madras - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 490. In both these cases, the labels on the medicaments bore brand names of both the manufacturers as well as the marketing company. In both the judgments, it was held that in such a situation, the mischief of paragraph 7 of the said notification was not attracted. 4. Shri Singh, the ld. DR defends the Commissioner s order placing reliance on the Tribunal judgment in the case of Thio Pharma v. CCE - 1992 (60) E.L.T. 395. In this judgment, in identical ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the arrangement of the logos on the packages was such that the name of the manufacturer was featured prominently. In the light of this judgment, we have examined the labels on the disputed products. In the case of 18 products, the logo of the marketing company is not shown on the label. In the case of other six products, the logo is shown but it is printed in smaller words and the area occupied by the trader logo is much smaller than the area occupied by the manufacturer logo. Therefore, the ratio of the Palsons Drugs judgment would squarely apply to the present case. 8. We have also examined the Nippa Chemicals judgment. In this case also the label bore the name and address of the manufacturer as also of the marketing company. In thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
