TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 108
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DEVENDER SINGH The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Centreless Grinding Machines, Crankshaft Grinding machines and Cylindrical Grinding machines etc. The Revenue felt that the respondent was wrongly availing SSI exemption in respect of the products being manufactured by them in as much as, the respondent have used the brand name 'RIAT SONS', whereas ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d goods to exploit the goodwill enjoyed by M/s.RMT. Hence, the SSI exemption under Notification No.8/2003-CE availed by the respondent during the period 1.10.2003 to 31.3.2008, has been sought to be denied and Central Excise duty has been proposed to be recovered from the respondent. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued demanding duty of Rs. 27,15,639/- along with interest and imposing pena....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....since 24.9.2005. 3. Ld.Advocate for the respondent submits that the trademark 'RIAT SONS was registered in their name in 2005 for machine and machine tools. He also submits that 'RIAT' and 'RIAT SONS' were separate brand names, which is proven from the fact that both have been registered separately. He relied on the following judgments: (i) Bhamber Engineers vs. CCE, Ludhiana- Final Order No.600....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the respondent is using brand name of another person. 6. We find that the matter is covered by the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Bhamber Engineers (supra), wherein this Tribunal has observed as below:- "As the brand name used by M/s. Bhamber Udyog is „HI BHAMBER‟ and by the appellant is BHAMBER 2015‟ are not similar, in that circumstance, it cannot be said that ....