Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (10) TMI 216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of JEPIKA PAINTS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [ 2008 (1) TMI 359 - HIGH COURT MADHYA PRADESH] benefit of small scale exemption has been extended in case of an unregistered assignment deed. Merely because deed of assignment of brand name was not registered cannot be held that the appellant did not own the brand name. Consequently, benefit of small scale exemption cannot be denied. The penalty imposed on Shri Sureshbhai Jivrajbhai Sakariya is also set aside and appeal is allowed - Appeal allowed. - HON'BLE MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) , MR. RAMESH NAIR And HON'BLE MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) , MR. RAJU Shri Sarju Mehta , Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri Sanjay Kumar , Superintendent ( AR ) for the Respond .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ian Contract Act, 1872, the consent of the promisor is freely given. 2.5. Learned Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon ble High of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Jepika Paint 2008 (232) ELT 424 (MP). He pointed out that both the companies that is the appellant and Prince Care Pharma Pvt Ltd are not manufacturing the same product, the product has been assigned to the appellant. 2.6. He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Que Pharma Pvt Ltd 2013 (288) ELT 563 (Tri. Ahm.) and Sadana Foods-2012 (284) ELT 257 (Tri.-Bang.). 2.7. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the product of manufactured by them namely, glucose powder, falls under heading 17023039 and is not covered by Sr No. 2 Notification No. 14/2008-CE (NT) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... marketing services to Prince Care Pharma Pvt Ltd. As regards the second objection in the impugned order that agreement was not registered, the appellants have relied on the Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh Jepika Paint 2008 (232) ELT 424 (MP). In para 8 of the following has been observed. : - 8. Learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that although assignments under the erstwhile Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 require registration, the Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad v. Vikshara Trading Invest. P. Ltd. 2003 (157) E.LT. 4 (S.C.) has observed that when as a matter of fact it is held that there was an assignment of trade mark in favour of the party and that fact was not in serious dispute, the mere .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d wherein relying on the decision of Hon ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of Jepika Paint 2008 (232) ELT 424 (MP) benefit of small scale exemption has been extended in case of an unregistered assignment deed. Similarly, in case of Sadana Foods-2012 (284) ELT 257 (Tri.-Bang.) following has been observed :- 2. After considering the submissions, we have found valid reasons to hold that SSI benefit cannot be denied to the appellant in respect of the subject goods on the ground that these goods were supplied to customers under a brand name belonging to another person. It is not in dispute that the brand name HOT BREADS was assigned to the appellant by M/s. Chaitanya Foods, Madras and that the appellant thereby acquired exclusive right to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eld that the benefit of the Notifications was admissible to them. The submission made by the lear Superintendent (AR) with reference to the remand order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is of no significan Inasmuch as it was an open remand ordered by the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Dhanvi Trading Investment Pv Ltd., one of the cases considered by the Apex Court in the reported case of Vikshara Trading Investment Pvt. Lte (supra). It has been pointed out that the Tribunal's decision in Dhanvi Trading investment Pvt. Ltd. [2005 (187) ELT. 270 (Tribunal)) was rendered in pursuance of the above remand order. We have perused this order of the Tribunal as well. The Notification considered therein was No. 175/86-C.E., para 7 of which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates