Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2003 (3) TMI 481

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the demand is hit by time-bar for most of the period and if at all duty is payable, the same is payable from 4-3-1996. On merits of the case, he states that the appellants are independent manufacturers with their own brand and that they have only taken technical know-how from the foreign company. He states that as per Para 8 of financial-cum-technical collaboration agreement dated 29-6-1987 between F. STAMP KG (GmbH & Co.) of F.R.G. and Fristam Pumps (India) Private Limited, they are allowed to use the mark "Manufactured by Fristam Pumps (India) Private Limited under licence from FRISTAM".  He also cites the following case laws in his support :- (1)     Commissioner v. Shalimar Paints Ltd. - A76 E.L.T. Vol. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....so states that the appellants have not disputed in the grounds of their appeal that the brand name of the foreign collaborator has been affixed with the appellants. He also produces a print out from the website of Fristam indicating they have a production unit in India. He also relies on the Larger Bench decision in the case of Namtech Systems Ltd. v. C.C.E., New Delhi - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 238 (Tribunal), the ratio of which has been approved by the Apex Court in the case of Indian Management Advisors & Leasing Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Delhi - 2002 (143) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.). 3. As regards limitation, he states that the Commissioner has given a clear finding in Para 7.1 of the impugned order that the appellants had wilfully suppressed the fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n this paragraph shall be applicable to the specified goods which are component parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances and cleared from a factory for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances and the procedure set out in Chapter X of the said rules is followed. Provided further that nothing contained in this paragraph shall be applicable to the specified goods where a manufacturer affixes the specified goods with a brand name or trade name (registered or not) of the Khadi and Village Industries Commission or of the State Khadi and Village Industries Board". 2. In our view, the interpretation is plain. If a manufacturer affixes to the specified goods a brand or trade n....