TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1771
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dhary, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW The issue in this appeal of M/s Capital Controls India Limited, against order-in-appeal no. SB(43-44)/MV/2011 dated 28th March 2011 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone - I, pertains to the upholding of the order of the original authority which had confirmed duty liability of Rs. 5,16,413/-, along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....demarks Act, 1958 on 30th August, 2005 with effect from 18th August 1999 for which the application was moved with the registry of Trade Marks. 5. It is seen from the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - V [2010 (260) ELT 117 (Tri.-Mumbai)] that '7. Nevertheless, with regard to registration of the trade mark, we have not found any inconsistency between the additio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel that the registration of the trade mark in favour of the assessee should take effect from 9-1-1996 is, therefore, unacceptable. We think, in this context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment cited by the JDR is relevant. Their lordships, in Prince Valve Industry's case (supra), were considering a similar question in relation to SSI Notification 1/93-C.E. It was held, that, as long as the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in para 5 of Notification 8/98-C.E. or para 4 of any of the other two Notifications. However, for the period prior to 18-8-1999, the assessee cannot claim the benefit, having regard to the relevant provisions of the Trade Mark Registered User Agreement dated 16-11-1995 (as amended by the supplement agreement dated 9-1-1996). These provisions of the agreement, as we have already noted, would go to ....