9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be used by another company for a different commodity like television - use of brand name for different goods is permissible under the law – Relying upon CCE, Ahmedabad v. Vikshara Trading & Invest P. Ltd. [2003 (8) TMI 49 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - While giving the full description of the goods manufactured by the appellant the words “SKN” are written at the top - there could be a bona fide belief on their part as regards the use of brand name SKN in respect of the goods manufactured by them, which were not being manufactured by the brand name owner M/s. SKN Associates – order set aside and the matter remanded back to the original adjudicatory authority – Decided in favour of aseesee. - E/1944/2005 - Final Order No. 56318/2013-EX(PB) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be extended to them. 4. Subsequent investigations revealed that the items being manufactured by the appellant were earlier being manufactured by M/s. SKN Associates. With the setting up of the appellant s factory, they applied to the trade mark authorities, for registration of the said SKN brand name, for use by the appellant in the goods manufactured by them. Such application was subsequently rejected by the trade mark authorities. 5. The appellants were issued a show cause notice dated 16-11-1998 raising demand of duty for the period 1-4-1994 to June, 1998. The same stands confirmed by the impugned orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the submissions made by both the sides and have gone through the impugned order. 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rk Hotline in respect of Gas Stoves, the same brand name can be used by another company for a different commodity like television. We also note that Tribunal during the relevant period held that such use of brand name for different goods is permissible under the law. One such decision of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court reported as CCE, Ahmedabad v. Vikshara Trading Invest P. Ltd. - 2003 (157) E.L.T. 4 (S.C.). We have also seen the declaration filed by the appellant with their range Central Excise authorities. While giving the full description of the goods manufactured by the appellant the words SKN are written at the top. As such, we agree with the learned Advocate that there could be a bona fide belief on their par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
