1999 (10) TMI 383

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant. Shri S. Kannan, DR, for the Respondents. [Order per : V.K. Asthana, Member (T)]. -  To get this appeal heard, the appellants are required to pre-deposit duty of Rs. 47,74,961/- and penalty of Rs.10,00,000/- imposed vide Order-in-Original No. 9/99 dated 19-05-99. The issue involves the question whether the appellants have used the brand name or trade mark of another person wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion regarding the use of brand name or trade mark is pari materia to a similar explanation available under Notification No. 175/86-CE. He submits that the issue of such a brand name vis-a-vis Notification No. 175/86-CE has already been considered by the Tribunal in the case of Chemguard Coatings P. Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 2000 (116) E.L.T. 840 (Tri.) = 1999 (34) RLT 560, wherein it was held th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er the main appeal itself. 6. On a careful consideration of the submissions, we find that the issue is no longer res integra as it is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Chemguard Coatings P. Ltd. and Nippa Chemicals P. Ltd. (supra). In the case of Chemguard Coatings P. Ltd. (supra) the legend was almost identical, inasmuch as that the name of the company which has autho....