2008 (7) TMI 627

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri M. Somasundaram, Consultant, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. -  In this appeal of the Revenue, the short question which arises for consideration is whether the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 as amended was available to the refined edible oils cleared by the respondents in unit containers in the month of April, 2003.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty as per Sl. No. 244 ibid. This benefit was given to the respondents by the lower authorities after finding that the above superscription on the product label was not a brandname. 2. In the present appeal, the Revenue has relied on the Apex Court's judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy v. Rukmani Pakkwell Traders, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.) = 2004-TIOL-51-SC-CX. In additi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h indicates that a combination of the alphabets S, V & S, each enclosed in a rectangular box, was registered as a trade mark for the respondents apparently with effect from July 1987. 3. After considering the submissions, we find that, during the period of dispute, the respondents had been using the combination of the alphabets S, V & S - each enclosed in a rectangular box - as their brand....