2008 (4) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Pastonji” which did not belong to them – assignment of brand name - held that on assignment, the assignee is to be treated as the brand name owner, even when the assignment deed is not registered - we hold that the benefit of SSI Notification1/93 is admissible to the appellants and hence set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals
Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President and A.K. Srivastav .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tt. Registrar of Trade Marks vide his letter dated 27.7.98, the brand name was assigned to M/s. KCEC under deed of assignment dated 3.2.95. Subsequent to the period in dispute in this case, the brand name is stated to have been re-assigned to Shri Suleman V. Hafizi and the appellants had not affixed the brand name on their goods after it was re-assigned in June, 1996. The brand name also does not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l in National Appliances [2006 (206) ELT 802] and the Tribunal's order in CCE, Belgaum vs Abidel (I) [2004 (172) ELT 95] and CCE, Mumbai vs Sampat P.Damodaran [2005 (192) E.L.T, 635]. Following the ratio of the above decisions, we hold that the benefit of SSI Notification claimed is admissible to the appellants and hence set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals, without recording any fin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X