9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iron castings classifiable under Chapter 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The premises of both the appellants were visited by the Central Excise staff on 26-3-1991 and on verification, they found that the appellants were affixing the name 'MF' on the brake drums manufactured by them before supplying them to their customers, M/s. TAFE. The brake drums were also affixed with part number. The assessees were availing exemption Notification 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986. It was ascertained that the brand name 'MF' was owned by M/s. TAFE and they were not eligible for the exemption under this notification. The officers seized certain brake drums from each of the unit affixed with the brand name 'MF' and part number of M/s. TAFE Ltd. 2.& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 27-11-1991/11-2-1992 held that the brake drums supplied by the noticees were with the brand name 'MF' and part numbers as per the specifications and drawings of the buyers, M/s. TAFE. He held that the letters 'MF' was the brand name of M/s. TAFE. He observed that in this case specified goods namely, brake drums had been embossed with the letters 'MF' and part numbers of TAFE. It is admitted that 'MF' is an abbreviated form of the name of 'Massey Ferguson' owned by TAFE. Thus, embossing the word 'MF' on the brake drums clearly indicated a connection in the course of trade between the goods and TAFE. He rejected the claim of the appellants that 'MF' is not the brand name and to be a brand name, it should appear alongwith its expansion or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, however, ordered for release of the seized brake drums in each case but directed that the same should be taken to RG 1 stock and cleared after following the procedure prescribed under the Rules. 4. Both the above said parties are in appeal against the respective orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras against them. 5. We have heard Shri R. Raghavan, Advocate for the appellants and Shri G.Sreekumar Menon, SDR for the respondents. 6. Learned Advocate for the appellants contended that the brake drums manufactured by both the appellants had been embossed only with letters 'MF' supplied to TAFE. Further, the part number of the components was also affixed on it as suggested by TAFE. He stated that the brand n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1986. In support of his contention the learned Advocate relied on the following decisions - (1) B.H.E.L Ancillary Association v. CCE - 1990 (49) E.L.T. 33 (Mad.) (2) Rukkani Pakkwell Traders v. CCE - 1999 (109) E.L.T. 204 (T) (3) Prakash Industries v. CCE - 2000 (119) E.L.T. 30 (Tribunal-LB) (4) Board's Circular No. 509/05/2000-CX., dated 18-1-2000. 7. Shri G. Sreekumar Menon, SDR for the respondents while reiterating the findings of the Collector given in his order stated that appellants were using the letters 'MF' embossed on their goods, the ownership of which was vested with buyers, M/s. TAFE. He stated that in terms of Explanation VIII of Notification 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986, this would constitute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore they have not used the brand, or trade name of M/s. TAFE in any of the brake drums supplied by them. We find force in the contention of the appellants. In terms of Explanation VIII under Notification 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986, a 'brand name' or 'trade name' shall mean a brand name or trade name whether registered or not, that is to say a name or mark, such as a symbol, monogram, label, signature, or invented word or writing which is used in relation to such specified goods for the purpose of indicating or so as to indicate a connection in the course of trade between the such specified goods and some person using such name or mark with or without any indication of the identity of that person. The purpose of affixing any mark or sy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EGAT in their decision in the case of Prakash Industries referred to supra have held as follows :- "6. It would be observed from the above cited instructions of the Central Board of Excise & Customs and the ratio of the decided cases that where the specified goods viz. castings covers, bags, PP caps, boxes, metal labels, crown corks, metal containers, sacks, wrappers etc., are marked with the brand name/logo of the customers and such branded goods are only supplied to the customers and not traded in the market, the use of the brand name is not in the "course of trade" and it would not amount to using brand name so as to deny the benefit to Notification No. 175/86-CX............" The ratio of the above decision also is squarely applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
