9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 768X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s irrespective of whether such brand name or trade mark is used by the holder as its owner or as a franchisee or as an assignee. We, therefore, reject this contention raised by the respondent as factually untenable. The sales tax revision cases are therefore allowed reversing the orders of the Tribunal and of the first appellate authority and by restoring the assessments. - - - - - Dated:- 26-2-2009 - RAMACHANDRAN NAIR C.N. AND SURENDRA MOHAN K. , JJ. ORDER:- The order of the court was made by C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR J. The tax revision cases filed by the State pertain to provisional monthly sales tax assessments of the respondent from April to December, 2003. Under an agreement executed between respondent-assessee and Joy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, this court specifically left freedom to the State to raise the issue on merits in subsequent assessments. Since the Tribunal has only followed their earlier order in T.A. No. 571 of 2004, the Government Pleader has produced a copy of the same and challenged correctness. We have heard Government Pleader and counsel appearing for the respondents. On going through the Tribunal's order for the earlier year which was followed by the Tribunal for allowing the appeals against which these revisions are filed, we notice that the Tribunal has extracted the entire agreement between the respondent and the brand-name owner, namely, Joy Ice Creams, Bangalore Pvt. Ltd. Even though under this franchisee agreement the respondent had agreed to pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. All what this court has said is that generally brand name owners use their brand name and so much so, holder in such context means owner. However, it is seen that section 5(2) uses only the word brand name holder instead of owner . It is clear from this that the Legislature was well aware of the practice of franchisee agreements generally executed by brand name owners permitting grantees to manufacture and sell in the brand name of its owner on consideration agreed between parties. In fact, brand name or trade mark is an assignable right and in this case admittedly under the agreement, the respondent has a five-year agreement on payment of a massive consideration of Rs. 75 lakhs for use of brand name Joy Ice Creams which is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
