2003 (3) TMI 621

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uthority. 2. Aggrieved by this order, the revenue has come in appeal on the ground that the respondent assessee are not eligible for concessional rates of duty under Notification No. 1/93 for the manufacture and clearances of the impugned goods bearing the brand names like "McHenderson", "Carlo Morandi", etc. which belong to foreign buyers. They have not registered these brand names in India nor have they obtained exclusive rights to use the various brand names in India and have inter alia reported that these are international brand names. 3. In support of their arguments Revenue relied on the Larger Bench judgment rendered by the Principal Bench, New Delhi in the case of Namtech Systems Ltd. v. C.C.E., New Delhi reported in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rade mark under the provisions of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 is available to the assessee. The present respondent-assessee had neither registered the various trade names in India with the Registrar of Trademarks nor has obtained the exclusive rights of the brand name, which disqualifies them from obtaining the exemption. 4. Shri P. Devaladu, DR reiterated the grounds of appeal and submits that since the international brand names are not registered in the name of the respondent assessee they are not entitled to claim the benefit of exemption notification as contained in Notification No. 1/93, dated 28-2-93. He therefore prayed that in view of the grounds of appeal, the impugned order passed by ld. Commissioner (Appeals) ma....