9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (11) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regional stores of APSRTC against their purchase orders wherein one of the conditions was that the goods must be with the 'IPR' brand. The department, on investigation, found the supplies with the IPR Trade mark and had held that the appellants had used the brand name of another person. The appellants contended that the Revenue had not discharged their burden of showing that the appellants had used the brand name and 'IPR' mark was a brand name or trade name. It was submitted that the department had incorrectly assumed that the mark 'IPR' was a brand name or a trade name when it was not so. It was contended that the statements of Shri K.K. Balachandar, GPA holder of the appellant unit and Shri C.T. Joseph, Authorised Signatory of M/s. Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndry v. CCE, Coimbatore, 2001 (137) E.L.T. 1180 (Tri.-Chennai) (ii) CCE, Chennai v. Turnbull Control System (I) Ltd., 2001 (127) E.L.T. 472 (Tri. - Chennai) 4.The learned Counsel also submitted that the demands were barred by time as the Show Cause Notice had been issued after two years of recording the statements. 5.The learned SDR reiterated the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of CCE, Trichy v. Grasim Industries Ltd., 2005 (183) E.L.T. 123 (S.C.). E/245/2005 6.This appeal arises from OIA No. 17/2004-CE dated 16-12-2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the department's appeal and set aside the original order which was in favour of the assessee. The department had confiscated 62 bundles of Precured T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, it is seen from the statements of Shri K.K. Balachandar and Shri C.T. Joseph that both had not admitted the use of brand name or trade name. They had denied having supplied various branded goods to anyone including M/s. India Rubber Products for IRP brands. Shri K.K. Balachandar, GPA holder of the appellant unit denied having manufactured the IRP branded goods and supplied the same to M/s. India Rubber Products. The statement of Shri C.T. Joseph, the Authorized Signatory of M/s. India Rubber Products also disclosed that they were supplying Precured Tread Rubber product to APSRTC. They put identification mark IRP on the Carton box/HDPE woven sacks in respect of Precured Tread Rubber, Tyre Flaps and Bonding Gum and in respect of Black Vul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icular. In Deebha Foundry (cited supra), it had been held that when goods were supplied to P.S.G. Institute, by affixing its initials "P.S.G." on the product, it does not amount to attracting mischief of use of brand name in terms of the Notification. In the case of CCE v. Tumbull Control Systems (I) Ltd. (cited supra), it had been held that affixing of sticker of company's name will not bring within the ambit of the definition of 'brand name'. Therefore, these judgments clearly apply to the facts of the case. 11.The learned SDR relied on the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. (cited supra). In this case, the trade name was being clearly used by the holding company and hence, the benefit was denied. These f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
