ORDER
V.K. Ashtana, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Original dated 26-12-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore. The period covered is from 1-10-1987 to 9-5-1988 and the issue involves the denial of SSI exemption as contained in the Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 as amended, to the appellants who have manufactured ‘Electric Point Machine’ in the specifications of Indian Railways for the captive use of Indian Railways on the railway tracks, because on the name plate thereof the words ‘Indian Railways’ have been engraved. The department feels that this incorporating words ‘Indian Railways’ amounts to the use of a brand name in terms of Explanation VII of the said Notification and therefore seeks to deny the said exemption.
2. Heard Sri G. Sampath, learned Advocate for the appellants and Sri S. Sankaravadivelu, learned JDR for the revenue.
3. The learned Advocate submits that the incorporation of the simple alphabetical words ‘Indian Railways’ cannot be considered to be a brand name for the following reasons :-
(a) The goods are not used for trading by the ‘Indian Railways’ i.e. the goods are only used for captive consumption by them, therefore, the words ‘Indian Railways’ are not to be construed/being used in the course of normal trade, as they are not being involved in trade they cannot be used as trade mark. He cites in this connection, the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Astra Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E. as reported in 1995 (75) E.L.T. 214 (S.C.) wherein it is held even on items which are traded like pharmaceutical medicine merely a monograph ‘AP’ – ‘Astra’ does not amount to a brand name, but merely is an indicative of the identity of the manufacturer. Here the learned Advocate argues that the words ‘Indian Railways’ is only an indicative of the identity of the owner of the said equipment which is captively used.
4. Heard learned JDR.
5. On a careful consideration of the rival submissions and records of the case, we find that in this case the fixation of the words ‘Indian Railways’ on the name plate of the product in question, does not amount to use of a brand name of non-SSI unit, as is contemplated under the notification noted above, because of a simple reason that the said words are only indicating the owner of the goods, which are not even traded but only used by ‘Indian Railways’ for captive consumption. In the case of Astra Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. (supra) the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that merely a few alphabetical words of monograph do not constitute the brand name, even if the goods are otherwise traded with that monographs. In the appellants case, we find that their position is stronger inasmuch as that not only such a monograph does not amount to the use of brand name, but the goods themselves are not traded. We, therefore, find that the impugned Order-in-Original needs to be set aside by applying the ratio of the aforesaid noted decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly. The appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.