The ownership of the trade mark is crucial in determining eligibility for exemption under the Central Excise Act.

ORDER :

Ashok Bhan, J.

This order shall dispose of these appeals as the point involved in these appeals is the same. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from Civil Appeal No. 4505 of 2003.

2. This is a statutory appeal under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') against the Final Order No. 469/02-B dated 8.11.2002 whereby the Customs Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') has rejected the appeal filed by the appellant.

3. The short question involved in these appeals is 'as to whether the appellants are eligible for the small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE dated 28.2.1993 as amended in respect of the 'SANT' brand 'non-ISI/non-IBR grade cocks and valves' manufactured and sold by them'.

4. Para 4 of the Notification provides that the exemption will not be available in respect of specified goods bearing the brand name of another person. The same reads:

"4. The exemption contained in this notification shall not apply to specified goods, bearing a brand name or trade name (registered or not) of another person."

5. Ram Prakash Sikka was one of the seven partners of M/s Sant Brass Metal Works. The Partnership was dissolved in the year 1986 and Ram Parkash Sikka withdrew himself from the Partnership. In the Dissolution Deed, it was provided that

"It is also mutually agreed that the retiring partner shall be at liberty to manufacture and sell only non-ISI items under the 'SANT' Reg. Trade Mark as detailed in the Price List No. 109/7-85 with Sl. No.101 to 175 forming Annexure-IV to this Deed. This part of the agreement shall be strictly adhered to by the retiring partner and the continuing partners shall be competent to resort to any legal courses in case of violation of this clause."

6. Ram Parkash Sikka thereafter set up M/s. Prince Valves Industry, the appellant herein, with 11 partners and started producing 'non-ISI/non-IBR grade valves and cocks' in the brand name of 'SANT'.

7. Appellant was served with a Show Cause Notice dated 14.9.1965 for the period April, 1995 to July, 1995 stating therein that the appellant had manufactured and cleared goods valued at Rs. 61,87,472/- during the period April, 1995 to July, 1995 by affixing brand name 'SANT' after discharging slab wise rate of duty at the rate of 5% and 10% ad valoram under small scale exemption whereas such branded goods were liable to duty at the rate of 15% ad valoram. That the benefit of exemption of Notification No. 1/93-CE dated 28.2.1993, as amended, was not available to the specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name (registered or not) of another person.

8. Appellant filed its reply to the Show cause notice.

9. The Assessing Authority rejected the objections raised by the appellant and confirmed the demand, aggrieved against which the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which was dismissed. Still not satisfied, the appellant filed the appeal before the Tribunal which has been disposed of by the impugned Judgment.

10. The Tribunal has held that the brand name 'SANT' continues to be registered in the name of M/s Sant Brass Metral Works and, therefore, the appellant will not be entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 1/93- CE. This is so because the appellant has only the limited right to use the brand name under the registered trade mark. The ownership of the trade mark had not been transferred to the appellant.

11. We find no infirmity in the judgment passed by the Tribunal and dismiss the appeals with no order as to costs.