2013 (11) TMI 691

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asad, SDR JUDGEMENT Per Mathew John: In today's cause list, two miscellaneous petitions filed by the appellant to bring on records facts relevant for condonation of delay are listed along with appeal. These applications were considered while allowing condonation of delay vide Misc. Orders No.41513-41514/2013, dated 21.06.2013 but not specifically ordered as disposed of in that order. Now ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndicating the name of the manufacturer as 'A.R.R. Enterprises' on the packages. Revenue was of the view that using the name of the manufacturers were the words 'A.R.R.' is occurring amounts to use of brand name and that too belonging to another company and for that reason Revenue proposed to deny the small-scale exemption. The reason as recorded in the impugned order for denial of exemption is rep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heir original logo/brand name stage by stage over a period but keep hold of the name 'A.R.R.' from which the product can be easily identified by the common consumers with its heritage and claim the product as 'unbranded'. The practice adopted by 'A.R.R. Enterprises' has to be considered as an attempt to gain an unfair and undue advantage defeating the object of the provisions of the beneficial law....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4, 925/10, dated 19.08.2010 is reproduced below:-          4. As for the latter period from 01.04.2004, the appellants have only indicated on the label that the impugned goods are manufactured by A.R.R. Enterprises. Such an indication is required to be made on the labels statutorily as also under Circular No.25/90-CX.8, dated 18.04.1990 issued by the Boar....