DUGAR TETENAL INDIA LIMITED Vs. CCE, JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for waiver of pre -deposit of duty and penalty. Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran, ld. Counsel arguing the case for the applicants submits that the applicants had a technical collaboration between them and M/s. Tetenal Vertriebs GmBH, Germany; that under the said agreement, the foreign collaborator was to provide technical know -how to the applicants and for this applicants had to pay a royality of 4% to the foreign collaborator; that the brand name "TETENAL" was registered in the name of the applicants and once the brand name was so registered in their name, they became the owners and therefore, they were the persons who were authorised to use the said brand name in India; that the applicants had filed classification list in 1988 itself wherein they had duly declared that they were using the brand name "TETENAL" which was their own brand name. Ld. Counsel submits that since the brand name was registered in their own name and since they were the owners of that brand name they were entitled to the benefit of Notf. No. 175/86.

(2.) LD . Counsel also submits that the present demand is totally barred by limitation as the applicants fully declared that they were using the brand name "TETENAL" in the classification list filed by them. He submits that thus there was no misdeclaration and, therefore the present demand is barred by limitation.

(3.) LD . Advocate submits that the applicants are a small scale unit and have been suffering losses and that they were not in a position to make any payment of duty and penalty.