9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded, (ii) demand was confirmed in respect of COSMOS brand tooth paste for April, 1994 to October, 1994 and (iii) demand was confirmed in respect of AQUADENT Brand tooth paste for the period from April, 1994 to October, 1994. 2. The short point to be considered in this case is whether on assigning the Brand name, an assignee i.e. the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Small Scale exemption in terms of notification No. 1/93, dated 1-4-1993 or not. 3. The appellants who are S.S.I. unit, manufacturing the goods of different brands. The Brand name 'COSMOS' was originally owned by M/s. Hindustan Rimmer and S.S.I. unit was transferred under an agreement dated 1-4-1992 to use the same on tooth paste manufactured by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Opus India v. Collector of Central Excise, reported in 1992 (62) E.L.T. 447. 5. Shri K. Srivastava, learned SDR, appearing for the Revenue, submitted that assignment deed dated 1-8-1993 was registered before Trade Mark registry on 1-1-96 and the party, in fact, has applied for registration only on 19-10-95. He justified the action taken by the Commissioner holding that the benefit of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was not available from the date of assignment but would be applicable and available only from the date of registration. In reply, Shri Laxmi Kumaran submits that the registration is not compulsory to avail benefit and, in fact, the notification is worded in such a way whether it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f", as meaning belonging to as per the dictionary meaning as given in the Stroud's Judicial Dictionary. Since ownership is the criteria to determine the eligibility of exemption with reference to Para 7 of the Notification and in view of the fact that trade mark belongs to appellants M/s. Opus India, we do not find any justification to deny the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 175/86. In the view we have taken, all these appeals are allowed with consequential relief". 7. Relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid decision, we hold that the appellants are entitled to benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 1/93-CE in respect of the goods cleared under Brand name 'COSMOS' w.e.f. 1-8-1993. 8. Thus, this appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
