TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 48
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re 3 issues involved in the first batch of appeal registered as appeal Nos. 141/2005, 143/2005 and 144/2005 relating to the period 01.12.1998 to 31.03.2004. MANUFACTURE- 'NIPPLE' 4. The first issue in the first batch of appeals is whether complete feeding bottles cleared, manufacturing only 'nipple' thereof and affixing/assembling thereto other components/accessories bought out from outside or manufactured by others, amounts to manufacture. 5. On behalf of appellant it was submitted that the 'nipple' manufactured by the appellant was exempted goods. Complete feeding bottles assembled making use of the nipples manufactured by the appellant was sold. Such sale would not amount to manufacture following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Trinity Products reported in MANU/MH/0127/1975 : 1975 (35) STC 502 (Bom.). Also he submits that the ratio laid down in Trinity's case was applied by Tribunal in the case Dalmia Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur 1999 (112) ELT 305 (Tri) and that was upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner v. Dalmia Industries Ltd. reported in 2005 (184) ELT A.37 (SC) (Sl.No.19 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s forums in Bentex Motor Control Industries v. CCE, New Delhi reported in 2002 (139) ELT 679 (Tri-Del), M/s. Ritzbury India (P) Ltd. and CCE, Chennai and M/s Ritzbury India (P) Ltd. reported in 2012 (192) ECR 0137 (Tri. Chennai) & CCE, Ahmadabad vs. Vikshara Trading & Invest P. Ltd. reported in 2003 (157) ELT 4 (SC) (Sl.No.12, 27 and 28 of the compilation filed). 12. According to ld. Counsel for appellants, if assignment is not recorded in the record of Registrar of Trade Mark that does not deprive the appellant from SSI exemption following the decision of the Tribunal specifically in Commissioner v. Dalmia Industries Ltd. reported in 2005 (184) ELT A.37 (SC), M/s. Ritzbury India (P) Ltd. and CCE, Chennai and M/s Ritzbury India (P) Ltd. reported in 2012 (192) ECR 0137 (Tri.-Chennai) (Sl.No.19 & 27 of the compilation). So also he relied on the Apex Court decision in CCE, Ahmadabad vs. Vikshara Trading & Invest P. Ltd. reported in 2003 (157) ELT 4 (SC) (Sl.No.28 of the compilation). 13. He further invited attention to the issue of brand name and exemption issue in terms of para 3 & 4 of the note of argument filed. Drawing attention to the date chart filed along with notes of ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....F BONNNE'. While the trade mark 'BONNY' was traceable to the use thereof by the Aneja family in their products prior to their family settlement, nothing could be brought out by revenue as to the original owner of the rest of the trade mark 'BABY CARE FROM THE MAKERS OF BONNE'. Therefore that aspect remained undisputed to be belonging to the appellant assessee in this bunch of appeals. 21. To deal with the issue of the brand name BONNY, factual back ground of ownership thereof being necessary, that is discussed in the paragraphs to follow. 22. As per information received by revenue from Trade Mark Registry in terms of letter No. TMR/MCG/Misc./CC/2003/22/2014 dated 04.07.2003 the brand name 'BONNE' was registered with that authority under registration number 220521 on 10.02.1964 and owners thereof were Shri Nand Lal Aneja, Shri Des Raj Aneja, Manohar Lal and Ms. Krishna Rani trading by a firm 'Bonny Products', 5602, Gandhi Market, Sadar Bazar, Delhi. Shri Nand Lal Aneja, Shri Manohar Lal Aneja, Shri Ramji Das and Shri Des Raj Aneja were all sons of Shri Amir Chand Aneja. They were carrying on business in partnership under the name and style of 'Bonny Products' with effect fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....neja W/o late Nand Lal Aneja, Shri Subhash Aneja, S/o Late Nand Lal Aneja and Smt. Sudesh Aneja W/o Shri Des Raj Aneja on 15.05.1997 it was decided in terms of clause 4 thereof that following members of Aneja family shall continue to be owner of the trade mark 'BONNE': 1. Smt. Sarla Aneja W/o Nand Lal Aneja 2. Shri Des Raj Aneja S/o Amir Chand Aneja 29. Above clause also refers to a family settlement dated 13.06.1983 stating that Shri Manohar Lal Aneja and Smt. Krishna Rani Aneja were already separated and they were also allowed to use the brand name 'BONNE' in the respective territory assigned to them. 30. Above said clause 4 of the deed of family settlement dated 15.05.1997 further states that Smt. Sarla Aneja W/o Late Nand Lal Aneja and Des Raj Aneja, S/o Amir Chand Aneja were entitled to use the trade mark 'BONNE' in any concern of which she/he is the sole proprietor and/or is a partner/is a director and each of them will be entitled to assign the said trade mark to any of the company concern in which she/he holds any interest of shares. 31. In terms of clause 1 of the deed of assignment dated 03....