9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ” were clearly and prominently printed. In between these two brand names, a hexagonal shape/design, which was claimed by the Department to be the brand of the Marketing Company, was also printed. In this backdrop, the question was as to whether the assessee company was using the said hexagonal shape/design of other person. On the facts of that case, the Court found that there was nothing on record to show that the said hexagonal shape/design belonged to or was owned by the Marketing Company and thus they had permitted the assessee to use the same on the corrugated boxes. The Court also found that the hexagonal design/shape could not be said to be descriptive enough to serve as an indicator of nexus between the goods of the assessee and the Marketing Company. On this basis, it was concluded that the alleged monogram could not be the brand name or trade name of the Marketing Company. Matter is not examined by the authorities below in the right perspective. The factual aspects can be established only before the adjudicating authority. Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of revenue - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9157 OF 2003 - - - Dated:- 19-3-2015 - A.K. SIKRI AND ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a connection in the course of trade between such specified goods and some person using such name or mark with or without any indication of the identity of that person. 3. The respondent replied to the aforesaid show cause notices in which it was admitted that Dr.K.Angi Reddy is the Chairman of Dr. Reddy Group of Industries which includes the respondent Company as well as DRL. The defence, however, was that Dr. K.Angi Reddy had not assigned the trade mark either to the respondent firm or any other manufacturer. It was also mentioned that the respondent as well as the DRL are Public Limited Companies having separate legal entities of their own with their own independent spheres of activities. In this behalf the contention was that DRL manufactured altogether different products than the products mentioned by the respondent Company. A plea was also raised that Dr. K.Angi Reddy in his individual capacity was not a manufacturer within the meaning of said expression as defined in the Central Excise Act. By raising the aforesaid submissions request was made to drop the proceedings. The aforesaid argument raised by the respondent persuaded the Adjudicating Authority who dropped the proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and name is used in relation to the specified goods indicating a connection in the course of the trade between such specified goods and some other person using the name, it would fit the description and the matter would be covered by the mischief of Explanation VIII. It is no where stated that brand name which is the name of other person and is being used by the SSI which is claiming benefit has to be in relation to same goods. Therefore, that could not have been reason to drop the proceedings and the CEGAT was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the Department on this ground. 7. The aforesaid principle of law is no more res integra and has been decided by this Court authoritatively in couple of judgments. In Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I Vs. Mahaan Dairies (2004) 11 SCC 798 this Court while interpreting the similar nature of definition of brand name or trade name, held as under : We have today delivered a judgment in CCE v. Rukmani Pakkwell Traders wherein we have held in respect of another notification containing identical words that it makes no difference whether the goods on which the trade name or mark is used are the same in respect of which the tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 'brand name' or 'trade name' which belongs to some other person. It is immaterial whether such 'brand name' or 'trade name' is registered or not. However, Explanation IX gives a unique and particular definition to the term 'brand name' or 'trade name'. It is clear from the reading of the said explanation that the definition of 'brand name' or 'trade name' contained therein is concerned with a particular name or mark which is used to indicate, in the course of trade, a connection between such specified goods as satisfying the criterion provided in aforesaid condition 4 and the manufacturer which is using such name or mark with or without any indication of the identity of itself. The central idea contained in the aforesaid definition is that the mark is used with the purpose to show connection of the said goods with some person who is using the name or mark. Therefore, in order to qualify as 'brand name' or 'trade name' it has to be established that such a mark, symbol, design or name, etc. has acquired the reputation of the nature that one is able to associate the said mark, etc. with the manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be a brand name or a trade name in the sense that it is normally understood. The exemption is only to such parties who do not associate their products with some other person. Of course this being a Notification under the Excise Act, the connection must be of such a nature that it reflects on the aspect of manufacture and deal with quality of the products. No hard and fast rule can be laid down however it is possible that words which merely indicate the party who is marketing the product may not be sufficient. As we are not dealing with such a case we do not express any opinion on this aspect. 16. This Court has, in the case of Royal Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of A.P., 1994 Supp (1) SCC 429, already held that words to the effect that is to say qualify the words which precede them. In this case also the words that is to say qualify the words brand name or trade name by indicating that these terms must therefore be understood in the context of the words which follow. The words which follow are of wide amplitude and include any word, mark, symbol, monogram or label. Even a signature of an invented word or any writing would be sufficient if it is used in relation to the prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brand name with the intention of indicating a connection with the assessees goods and such other person or uses the name in such a manner that it would indicate such connection. Therefore, if the assessee is able to satisfy the assessing authorities that there was no such intention or that the user of the brand name was entirely fortuitous and could not on a fair appraisal of the marks indicate any such connection, it would be entitled to the benefit of exemption. An assessee would also be entitled to the benefit of the exemption if the brand name belongs to the assessee himself although someone else may be equally entitled to such name. These observations bring out two significant aspects namely:- (1) As per the Notification, the assessee would be debarred only if it uses on the goods in respect of which exemption is sought, the same/similar brand name with the intention of indicating a connection with the assessees goods and such other person or uses the name in such a manner that it would indicate such connection. If there is no such intention or that the user of the brand name was entirely fortuitous and could not on a fair appraisal of the marks indicate any such connec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
