2001 (3) TMI 707

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. The appellants are manufacturers of pesticides. They manufacture pesticides under their own brand name and Agr Evo , marketed by M/s. Hoechst Schering Agr Evo Ltd. 2. Appellants claimed benefit of exemption under Notification No. 1/93, dated 28-2-1993, including on the goods which bore the mark Agr Evo . The proceedings impugned in this appeal ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Agr Evo , fresh computation of duty demand is required to be made. He submitted that under the notification, value of the goods made under the brand name of another person was required to be excluded while computing the value of goods eligible for SSI exemption. He submitted that goods cleared by the appellant under his own name had been cleared on payment of duty at higher rates on account of inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g pesticides. Rule relating to house mark is applicable only in respect of medicine. The judgment of the Supreme Court was rendered in the context of exemption of patent and proprietary medicines. That principle relating to assessment of patent and proprietary medicine is not applicable to the assessment of pesticides involved in the present appeal. The mark Agr Evo connected the goods to Hoechs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X