Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was denied the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 on the ground that the name plate affixed on the products showed technical collaboration with another concern, amounting to use of another person's brand name or trade name.
Analysis: The exemption under the notification was unavailable only where the specified goods bore the brand name or trade name of another person so as to indicate a connection in the course of trade between the goods and that person. The name plate in question referred only to manufacture in technical collaboration with the foreign collaborator and did not project the collaborator's brand name as a market identifier for the goods. The product remained identified as the assessee's own product, and mere reference to technical know-how or collaboration did not establish the necessary trade connection. On this reasoning, the earlier view that such use amounted to use of another person's brand name was not accepted.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification and the disallowance on the brand name issue was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: A reference to technical collaboration on a product or name plate does not amount to use of another person's brand name unless it is used as a mark indicating a connection in the course of trade between the goods and that person.