TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 510
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brand name of "Rusty Soul" and "Woods & Woods" and "Jeanagers". It is also the case of the revenue that since benefit of notification 8/2001 as amended will not be applicable the differential duty needs to be worked out from the date the PE exceeded the exemption limit. Further, the authorities had seized 2985 pieces of shirts having the same brand as hereinabove referred on a presumption that these were manufactured by PE, PE were given an option to release the goods provisionally, which was accepted. The said seized goods were confiscated and were permitted to be redeemed on payment of Redemption Fine. The authorities after investigation has issued show-cause notices to PE and the partner of PE. The Adjudicating Authority after following the due process of law confirmed the differential duty and also imposed equivalent penalty on PE and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,25,000/- on the appellant S.H. Shah besides confiscated the seized goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of Redemption Fine. On an appeal, the first appellate authority concurred with the views of the Adjudicating Authority. 3. Ld. Counsel after drawing our attention to the various documents like show-ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... premises belongs to appellant is undisputed and Hiralal Gulabchand & Co. on whose stock these garments were shown is the proprietary concern of Shri Siddharth H. Shah, second appellant in these cases. Since both the companies are managed by one person and benefit arising go to same group of person, the confiscation ordered of the goods is correct and option to redeem the same was correctly given to PE. 5. We have considered the submission made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6. The short issue that arise for our consideration is whether the main appellant PE is liable to pay differential duty for the period in question, on the redeemed garments bearing the brand name and manufactured and cleared by them and consequently interest and penalties on the main appellant as well as other appellant. 7. We find from the records that the Adjudicating Authority as well as the first appellate authority have recorded that the readymade garment bearing the brand name "Rusty Soul" "Woods & Woods" were belonging to Hiralal Gulabchand & Co., whose proprietor is Shri Siddharth H. Shah. Both the lower authorities have come to a conclusion that the said brand were registered....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 27.03.2003 (Exhibit VIII) 10. It can be seen from the above reproduced paragraph and letters of Hiralal Gulabchand & Co. there is a controversy as to whether the brand name "Rusty Soul" "Woods & Woods" were registered with the authorities or otherwise. The entire issue of demand of the differential duty and confiscation of the seized goods can be settled only on this point whether the registration of the said brand were granted by the authorities or otherwise. The report of Registrar of Trade Marks in respect of "Woods & Woods" indicates as under:- 11. As regards the brand "Rusty Soul" , the Registrar of Trade Marks has recorded as under:- 12. It can be seen from the above reproduced letter of the Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai that the said brand name Rusty Soul and Woods & Woods were not registered and the status were indicated as New application . We are unable to understand how the show-cause notice indicates that the said brand were registered with the authorities since the show-cause notice has referred to same letter which is Exhibit VII & IX, which we have reproduced, which indicates that the said application were only New application and brand n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rks Act, 1958 and the same has not yet been registered. (3) It is clarified that excise duty applies only when the brand name is actually registered under the Trade & Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The mere filing of application for registration of brand name will not attract Central Excise duty. (4) Therefore, the earlier Trade Notice No. 18/2001 dated 3/3/2001 stands modified accordingly. (5) All the trade association are requested to bring the comments of the said trade notice to the attention of their member manufacturers in particular and to the trade in general." 13. The contents of the notification and as reproduced would indicate clearly that the benefit of notification 12/01-CE would be applicable to the appellant here as it is on record that the brand "Rusty Soul" and "Woods & Woods" were not registered with the authorities and application were made. In our considered view, as the benefit of notification 12/01-CE is applicable to the readymade garment manufactured by the appellant, no Central Excise duty liability arises on them. Accordingly, the differential demand of duty along with interest is liable to be set aside and we do so. Since the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SVO PAGE: DATE: 27-Mar-2003 SMT SHAKU MURU CHAINAN Ganeshtlager, B-24, RC. Marg, Behind Shakti Enterprises, Chemour Colony. Bombay 400 074 MR. AVTAR SINGH GURDWARA ROAD, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI-110 005 GOODS DESC READYMADE GARMENTS, WEARING APPARELS, HOSIERY AND FOOTWEAR. 857025 25 WOODS & WOODS GOODS DESC READYMADE GARMENTS INCLUDED IN CLASS 25 910572 25 WOODS & WOODS JAWAHAR DHANDEDHA SHOP NO. 3, 92-F, NIZAMUDDIN BLDG. PPS. IST ROAD, S.V. ROAD, OLD KHAR WEST. MUMBAI-52 SIDDHARTH H. SHAH A-1,123, SHAH & NAMAR, IND. ESTATE. SITARAM JADHAV MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI 400 013 STATUS New Application New Application New Application New Application 00003 DESC READYMADE GARMENTS INCLUDING ALL IMES IN CLASS 25 S.V.Desa Examiner of Trade Marks Document 3 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TRADE MARK REGISTRY Central Lg M. Karys Read, Mette-27 14-2003 ×’ ×– Prom THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS, MUM Te OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CFHT EXCISE MUMBAI-JV 115, NEW CENTRAL EXCISE ALDG. MRD, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAT-400 020 16206 Subject Application on Form TM-54 ....