TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 1493
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Delhi, manufacturers of different types of filters under the brand name 'VIKING' and 'NGR'. ii. M/s Viking Filters Industry, New Delhi, manufacturers of air filters with brand name 'VIKING'. iii. M/s Vee Kay Enterprises (Proprietor Shri Vijay Dhawan). The firm was engaged in trading of tractor parts and packing and labeling of goods with brands 'VIKING' & 'VIZA'. iv. M/s Clutch Engineers (proprietor Shri Vineet Dhawan), younger brother of Shri Vijay Dhawan. 3. During the course of the search, the Departmental officers found and seized goods bearing the brand names of 'VIKING' & 'VIZA' along with various packing materials found in 'M/s Vee Kay Enterprises' as well as 'M/s Clutch Engineers'. During the course of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e brand name 'Viking' that this belongs to three persons - Shri Vinod Kumar Dhawan, Shri Vijay Kumar Dhawan (Proprietor of Vee Kay Enterprises) and Shri Jugal Kishore Kohli. He submitted that this clearly establishes that M/s Vee Kay Enterprises was entitled to use the brand name 'VIKING' as their brand and hence will be entitled to the SSI benefit, even if the affixing of brand is considered as manufacture. ii. He emphasized the fact that both M/s Vee Kay Enterprises as well as M/s Clutch Engineers were trading firms and were procuring goods from each other as well as other suppliers as per the requirements of the market. He emphasized that 'VIKING' brand goods were procured by M/s Clutch as well as 'VIZA' brand by M/s Vee Kay Ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rightly embossed by M/s Clutch Engineers who are entitled to use the same. The denial of SSI Benefit to both firms and demand of duty is not justified and is it prayed that the same may be set aside and the confiscation also set aside. He also relied on various case laws. 6. The Ld. DR justified the impugned order. The main points urged by him are summarized below:- i. The activity of packing and affixing the brand name is a process of manufacture and both M/s Vee Kay Enterprises as well as M/s Clutch Engineers are liable to payment of duty for such activity of packing and embossing brand name. ii. He submitted that even if the brand name 'VIKING' is owned by M/s Vee Kay Enterprises, they will be liable to payment of du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of packing as well as affixing the brand names. Hence I conclude that liability for the payment of Central Excise stands established against both the appellants. 9. Even though the liability for Excise duty stands established, the same needs to be evaluated in the light of the provisions of the Small Scale Exemption Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01/03/2003, as amended. The notification exempts the first clearances of the specified goods up to the value of Rs. 1.5 Crore. However, such exemption will not be available if the goods are manufactured and cleared bearing the brand name of any other person. The case made by Revenue is that both the appellant firms have fixed the brand names 'VIKING' as well as 'VIZA' which do not belong to th....