2006 (1) TMI 39

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch who had given sub-contract to others. Similar contracts have been placed on M/s. Abilash Rubber Products and M/s. Navbharath Rubber Industries. The department initiated proceedings against the appellant and similar SSI units and denied the benefit of SSI exemption on the ground that the appellants had used the company mark 'IRP' (India Rubber Products) on the tyre flaps supplied to APSRTC. Learned counsel submits that appeal of M/s. Abilash Rubber Products and M/s. Navbharath Rubber Products was considered by this bench which is on the like issue on the basis of the same investigation and this bench was pleased to allow the appeals as there was no use of brand name IRP on the products. Learned counsel furnishes a copy of Final Order Nos.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellants unit denied having manufactured the IRP branded goods and supplied the same to M/s. India Rubber Products. The statement of Shri C.T. Joseph, the Authorized Signatory of M/s. India Rubber Products, also disclosed that they were supplying Precured Tread Rubber product to APSRTC. They put identification mark IRP on the Carton box/HDPE woven sacks in respect of Procured Tread Rubber, Tyre Flaps and Bonding Gum and in respect of Black Vulcanisng Solution/Cement, they stenciled their identification mark IRP along with other particulars. These IRP marks were required to differentiate their products with other suppliers by APSRTC to enable them to evaluate the performance of various products. From these details, it is very clear that the ....