2015 (6) TMI 1008

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....95-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 were admitted on the following substantial questions of law: T. C. (A) No. 37 of 2009: "(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in upholding the order of the lower appellate authority that butter and ghee sold with the name 'Nathan's pure ghee' cannot be equated to brand name and hence not liable to higher rate of tax ? (ii) Whether the order of the Tribunal in having deleted the consequent penalty levied by the assessing authority is legally correct ?" T. C. (A) Nos. 119 and 425 of 2011: "(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the assessment mad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessment year 1996-97 and 10 per cent. for the assessment year 1997-98, on the ground that the assessee had sold the ghee under the brand name. Aggrieved by the said enhancement in the rate of tax on the sale of butter and ghee, the assessee filed appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who set aside the assessment and restored the original assessment. Aggrieved by the orders of the first appellate authority, the Revenue filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after examining the relevant records and after considering the submissions made on both sides, dismissed the appeals holding that mere mentioning of Nathan Pure Ghee could not be stated to be a registered trade mark or specific emblem or recognised symbol. 3....