2008 (7) TMI 627

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. In this appeal of the Revenue, the short question which arises for consideration is whether the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 as amended was available to the refined edible oils cleared by the respondents in unit containers in the month of April, 2003. The benefit was not available to refined edible oils put up in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the lower authorities after finding that the above superscription on the product label was not a brandname. 2. In the present appeal, the Revenue has relied on the Apex Court s judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy v. Rukmani Pakkwell Traders, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.) = 2004-TIOL-51-SC-CX. In addition, the learned Jt. C.D.R. has relied on Commissioner of Central Excise, Trich .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... k for the respondents apparently with effect from July 1987. 3. After considering the submissions, we find that, during the period of dispute, the respondents had been using the combination of the alphabets S, V S - each enclosed in a rectangular box - as their brandname/trade mark and this was got registered by the Trade Marks Registry. The superscription on the product label used by the resp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X