TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 304
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nufactured and supplied gold coins to be distributed by the Government of Tamil Nadu under some welfare scheme undertaken by the Government and also to M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Pvt. Ltd., for distribution to their employees. The department opined that the appellant manufactured gold coins bearing a brand name of others and thus gold manufactured by them attract 1% duty in terms of Notification No.12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 as per Sl. No. 200. A Show cause notice (SCN) dated 07.02.2019 was issued to the appellant and was confirmed by the impugned order dated 19.09.2019, wherein the learned Commissioner has confirmed the duty of Rs. 1,65,49,141/- and appropriated the amount paid towards duty and interest and imposed equal penalty un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....identification of the manufacturer to the common public in respect of the Government of Tamil Nadu and for the same purpose in respect of gold coins supplied to Chettinad Cements Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Learned Counsel submits that the clarification dated 25.03.2011 issued by the CBEC is in their favour and relied upon the following judgments:- 1. Astra Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh reported in 1995 (75) ELT 214 (SC) 2. Tarai Food Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II 2006 (198) ELT 323 SC 3. Shruti Art (P) Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai 2019 (369) ELT 986 (Tri.-Mum.) 4. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. Hemkunt Builders 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that what the adjudicating authority has lost sight of is the fact that though the appellants have inscribed/embossed the name of the customers as well as Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Chettinad Cements Corporation Pvt. Ltd., it could not be said to be a "brand‟ used in connection of trade and commerce engaged by the person. It is not the case of the department that either of the customers of the appellant is engaged in the trade and gold coins bearing their brand. Therefore, the very concept of branding goods is not appreciated in a legal and proper manner. Admittedly, inscribed or embossed on the gold coins manufactured by the appellants have their customers is certain identification with the respective customers who have got the gold co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....some person using such name or mark...". In the present case, the markings on the jute bags are not for the purpose of indicating a connection in the course of trade between the jute bag and some person using such name or mark. The markings are by compulsion of law only in order that Governmental Authorities involved in the PDS may identify and segregate the aforesaid jute bags. This being the case, it is obvious that there is no "brand name" involved in the facts of the present cases." 5.3 We further find that the Tribunal in the case Shruti Art Pvt. Ltd. (supra) Held that - "5.2 From plain reading of the said notification and circular referred, above it is evident that the use of brand name should in the course of trade in ....