News Update

Indian Coast Guard intercepts Pakistani boat with 86 kg drugs worth Rs 600 CroreGold watch of richest Titanic pax auctioned for USD 1.46 millionIraq is latest to criminalise same-sex marriage with max 15 yrs of jail-termUndersea quake of 6.5 magnitude strikes Java; No tsunami alert issuedZelensky says Russia shelling oil facilities to choke supply to Europe20 army men killed in blasts at army base in Cambodia3 Indian women from Gujarat died in mega SUV accident in USJNU switches to NET in place of entrance test for PhD admissionsGST - fake invoice - Patanjali served Rs 27 Cr demand noticeI-T - Bonafide claim of deduction by assessee which was accepted in first round of proceedings does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars, simply because it was disallowed later: ITATIndia-bound oil tanker struck by Houthiā€™s missiles in Red SeaSCO Defence Ministers' Meeting endorses 'One Earth, One Family, One Future'RBI issues draft rules on digital lendingI-T - In order to invoke revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263, twin conditions of error in order and also prejudice to interest of Revenue must be established independently: ITATCRPF senior official served notice of dismissal on charges of sexual harassmentIndian Air Force ushers in Digital Transformation with DigiLocker IntegrationColumbia faculty blames leadership for police action against protestersCX - When process undertaken by assessee does not amount to manufacture, even then CENVAT credit is admissible if such inputs are cleared on payment of duty which would amount to reversal of credit availed: CESTATGoogle to inject USD 3 bn investment in data centre in IndianaCus - The equipments are teaching accessories which enable students in a class to respond to queries and these equipments are used along with ADP machine, same merits classification under CTH 8471 60 29: CESTATUN says clearing Gaza mounds of rubble to take 14 yrsST - When issue is of interpretation, appellant should not be fastened with demand for extended period, the demand confirmed for extended period is set aside: CESTAT
 
CX - Mentioning part number on Air shaft/Air chucks and brand 'TIDLAND' on letterhead, invoices and catalogues does not amount to use of 'brand name' so as to be held ineligible for benefit of SSI exemption notification: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JAN 23, 2017: THE appellant Assessee manufactures 'air shaft' and 'air chucks' under exclusive licence to manufacture and sell these products under arrangement with M/s Tidland Corporation, USA who, along with M/s Kohli Converting Machines Pvt. Ltd., are equal shareholders in the registered company.

Goods manufactured by assessee are sold to 'original equipment manufacturer's (OEMs) or buyers of equipment who require replacements, as these are tailor-made for the OEMs. The appellant had been availing benefits of SSI exemption under notification(s) 8/1998-CE, 8/1999-CE, 8/2000-CE, 8/2001-CE, 8/2002 and 8/2003-CE.

On the ground that the assessee has been using an ineligible brand on the products cleared by them, the benefit of SSI exemption was sought to be denied for the period March 1999 to September 2003.

The demand of CE duty of Rs.28,34,832/- was confirmed by the CCE along with imposition of an equivalent penalty on the assessee and also a penalty of Rs.3 lakhs on the Director.

Before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted that the brand 'TIDLAND' was not affixed on any of the products cleared by them and that the name was to be found only on letterheads, clearance invoices and catalogues which is not a restriction in the said notifications. The plea of the demand being hit by limitation is also taken by the appellant.

The Bench adverted to the conclusion by the adjudicating authority that for custom-made products, mere printing of brand name on document is sufficient to deny eligibility under the notifications and that the use of the 'part number' on the finished product is intended to establish the origin of the product and remarked that these conclusions do not appear to have any basis in the content of statutory instrument whose application has been denied by the impugned order.

Inasmuch as they appeared to be philosophical musings on the nature and purpose of the restriction in the exemption notifications without a forthright conclusion to the effect that this interpretation must, unerringly, lead to denial of exemption, the CESTAT added.

Coming down heavily on the reliance placed on the contents of the 'support' menu in the website of the overseas collaborator and the inferences drawn there from, the CESTAT observed -

"6. These, undoubtedly, are admirable sentiments and could well be a manifesto for action in particular context. As background note for a strategic recommendation, it may well be deserving of encomiums. However, adjudicating of tax disputes are intolerant of such intellectual forays and, most often, recall us to the path of strict adherence where an exemption notification is the cause of action. We are, therefore, compelled to swerve from the enjoyable perusal of a literary ramble and return to the uncompromising legalese of the exemption notification."

After extracting paragraph 4 of the SSI notification(s) and referring to the decision in Otto Blitz (India) Pvt. Ltd. - 2015-TIOL-217-SC-CX, the Bench further observed -

++ It is amply clear that it is the goods that must be affixed with the ineligible brand name for the exclusion to take effect. There is no allegation that this is so.

++ It would not be in accord with the intent of the notification if the part/serial number were to be considered as 'brand name' as the definition of "brand name" cannot, by any stretch, be intended to encompass what, at best, can be described as an aid to manufacture or assembly.

++ We also take note that the agreement confers exclusive rights to the appellant-assessee to use the 'trademark' and, from this, it would appear that the impugned mark is no longer that of the overseas collaborator for the purpose of the specified territory but is that of the appellant-assessee.

The impugned order was set aside and the appeals were allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-201-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.