2005 (2) TMI 316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed 12-12-2001. The appellants are engaged in the sale of bakery products. They have been denied the SSI Exemption on the ground that the Cakes and Pastries are sold by the appellants under the brand name 'Nilgiris', as they have Franchise Agreement with 'Nilgiris 1905'. The appellants' contention is that these Cakes and Pastries are sold in their restaurant and they are not putting the brand name .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d name of any other person and the Tribunal held that SSI exemption is not deniable. While the Revenue is relying on the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of CCE, Chandigarh-I v. Mahaan Dairies - 2004 (166) E.L.T. 23 (S.C.) wherein the brand name 'Mahaan', a registered trade name of another company was printed on pickle packs and sold by the respondents and hence the benefit was denied. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nnaught Plaza Restaurant (P) Ltd., the products were sold from the outlet of McDonald and on that ground, a view was taken that that by itself, the benefit of the SSI exemption cannot be denied. It was also noticed that the department had also observed that 'It is not the case of the department that cup or cone in which the soft serve is served is bearing any brand name". We find the present situa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X