Per P.C. Jain :

1.1 A similar issue is involved in both these appeals. Therefore, a common order is being passed.

1.2 In the first case, the respondents herein manufacture sanitary towels with the trade name "Comfit". It is the contention of the respondents that the said trade name is owned by them and it is duly registered in their name with the competent authorities. On the other hand, the Revenue claims that on the label of the packing of the excisable goods expression `Christine Hoden London, Rome Stockholm' is also occurring thereby creating a connection in the course of trade between the goods and the Christine Hoden London, Rome Stockholm.

2.1 Similarly in the other case, the respondents are the assignees of the trade name 'Comfit Always' with a picture device shown on the label.

3.1 The lower authority has extended the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 on the ground that the two respondents herein have not affixed the brand name or trade name of another person. This finding is contested by the Revenue on the ground that indication of 'Christine Hoden London, Rome Stockholm' is a name or a trade name as per the definition given in Notification No. 175/86-CE and therefore,