2005 (8) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on. 1.2 Earlier the matter was remanded back to examine the facts and decide the issue in term of this Tribunal decision in the case CCE, Mumbai-II v. Aarem Enterprises - 2003 (153) E.L.T. 111 (Tri. - Mum), wherein exemption was allowed where a sticker of marketing firm bearing its logo and boldly states "checked" was allowed benefit of SSI exempted in a notification [8/98] as sticker indicated goods to have met a certain quality standard and will not constitute use of Trade mark of another person. 1.3 The remand order of the Tribunal specifically mentioned the determined of the exact location of the impugned term i.e. the goods and the manner of packing i.e. on inner or outer packing only. Commissioner, in the remand proceeding found....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lants had supplied evidence to the effect of same goods having been supplied/cleared without these markings claiming that the demands on these goods cannot be upheld. 1.5 On time-bar, the appellants make out a case that the case of Aarem Enterprise was settled only on 28-6-2002, while ruling in favour of assessee while the case of Climax Pipes Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 637, an order dated 29-1-99, on outer packaging marks was in their favour which hold that outer covering marks will not deny the SSI benefit. 1.6 Ld. DR relies on Bhalla Enterprises - 2004 (173) E.L.T. 225 (S.C.) and supports the Commissioner's findings, with the stand that the clause in the notification has been changed for goods affixed with brand names to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d on the goods themselves. This essential fact has to be redetermined i.e. whether the mark is affixed on the goods or only on the secondary packing or the primary packing". There is no doubt that it is placed only on secondary packing. Secondary packing is only for transportation of the goods and is not to be reckoned for the purpose of determining the assessable value for levy of duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944. That position in law is well-settled. Therefore, when the mark impugned is at some place which is not under or encompassed under the levy, then such marks have to be ignored for the purpose of the Central Excise Law and the notification. Markings on Transportation Containers, where they are placed in this case, will not....