Case Law Details
Appu Hotels Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
The issue is whether the appellant can be denied the benefit of exemption of Notification No.8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 on the allegation that the appellant has cleared goods using the brand name of another.
In the present case, the appellants have entered into an agreement with Meridien SA dated 12.4.2000 by which they have acquired the brand name “Le Royal Meridien”. They have been given the exclusive right to use the brand name till the expiry of the agreement. Therefore, it cannot be said that they are using the trademark of another person. This issue was considered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Otto Bilz (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein the foreign brand name owner when had assigned the trademark to the Indian company under an agreement with the right to use the trademark exclusively in India, the Hon‟ble Court held that the Indian company is entitled to SSI exemption.
We do not find any grounds to take a different view. Following our decision in the earlier final order supra, we find that the demand cannot sustain. Impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
