2004 (2) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stoms, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) dated 30th April, 2001. The question before the Tribunal was whether the respondents are entitled to exemption of Notification No. 8/98-C.E., dated 2nd June, 1998. Under this Notification certain goods were exempted from payment of excise duty. However, the exemption was not available if the goods bore a brand name or trade name (whether re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../s. Mahaan Dairies Ltd. Of course it is claimed that they are all independent companies having different Board of Directors and different shareholders. That may be, but the question is whether or not the respondents have used the brand name or trade name of some other Company. 3.It is admitted that the word "Mahaan" written in a distinctive style is a registered trade mark of M/s. Mahaan Foods ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds "Taste Maker" the Respondents could get the benefit of the Notification. 6.We have today delivered a Judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy v. Rukmani Pakkwell Traders - 2004 (165) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.) (Civil Appeal Nos. 3227-3228/1998) wherein we have held in respect of another Notification containing identical words that it makes no difference whether the goods on which the trade ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otification or by adding words to the Notification benefit cannot be conferred. The Tribunal has based its decision on a decision delivered by it in Rukmani Pakkwell Traders v. CCE, Trichy [1999 (109) E.L.T. 204]. We have already overruled the decision in that case. In this case also we hold the decision of the Tribunal is unsustainable. It is accordingly set aside. 9.It was, however, urged tha....