2003 (3) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... For short 'the CEGAT') dated 14th March, 2000 and 9th October, 2001. The point involved in both these appeals is whether the appellants are entitled to benefit of Notification No. 75 of 1994, dated 29th March, 1994. This Notification exempts from payment of duty medicaments used in, amongst others, Ayurvedic preparation manufactured in accordance with the formula prescribed in Ayurvedic books spec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... using any other mark or symbol or monogram or invented words. It is submitted that mere use of additional words would not deprive a party of the benefit of the Notification. It is submitted that the word "Maha Bhringol" is not a trade or a brand name and that the appellants do not have any proprietary right to these words. It is pointed out that the appellants have filed an affidavit to this effe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he ayurvedic text books but using some other formulas." 4.It is submitted that the case of the appellants falls squarely under Clause (b) above. It is submitted that they are selling "Maha Bhringraj Oil". It is submitted that they are merely adding the words "Maha Bhringol". It is submitted that this is permissible as per the clarification issued in the Trade Notice. 5.We have seen the wrapper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X