9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of basic excise duty alleging that the excisable goods were removed without payment of duty. 3. The legal issue which is involved in these cases is, whether the petitioners are entitled for the exemption from payment of duty on goods bearing the brand name of another person cleared from their factory in terms of the relevant Notifications. The said issue has been finally decided in the assessee's own case in Kali Aerated Water Works vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Madurai, reported in 2015 (320) E.L.T. 692 (S.C.), wherein the appeal filed by the petitioner / assessee was allowed. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows: "4.It is clear from the above that the trade name 'Kalimark Aerated Water Works' and trade mark me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the appellant in respect of the Mutual Agreement. I have read the entire contents of Mutual Agreement. I find that Mr.K.P.R.Sakthivel is also a party to the said Mutual Agreement and no royalty is also payable to the said K.P.R.Sakthivel. Even Mr.K.P.R.Sakthivel has specifically agreed that he cannot use the brand name in the marketing area of the appellant. Thus there seems to be recognition of individual proprietary rights over the brand names within the respective specified marketing area. The nature of succession of the proprietary rights of the brand names have also been clearly dealt with. It clearly establishes that the appellant and the male descendants are alone are entitled to succeed over the ownership of the brand name with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E.L.T. 585 (S.C.)]. 4. The above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was followed by the CESTAT in the assessee's own case in a batch of appeals in Appeal No.R/518/2008 etc. dated 15.10.2015 and all the appeals have been allowed. The operative portion of the order reads as follows: "6. Since the Apex Court has settled the issue of using the brand name and trade name in the appellant's own case, by respectfully following the Apex Court's decision above, we hold that the appellants are using their own brand name and are eligible for SSI exemption under Notification No.8/03-CE dated 01.03.2003. Hence, penalties involved in all the appeals are not sustainable. Accordingly, all the impugned orders are set aside and all the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
