Excise Duty not Payable on House Mark Engraved on Gold Coins: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that excise duty is not applicable on the mark engraved on gold coins by M/s. AVR Swarnamahal Jewelry Limited, as it is merely a house mark, not a brand name. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing and clearing various types of jewelry and gold coins, argued that the mark 'AVR/AVRJ' engraved on their gold coins was used to identify them as the manufacturer and should not be considered a brand name. The Tribunal agreed, noting that a house mark is used to identify the manufacturer, while a brand name identifies a product and carries additional connotations such as personality and reputation.\r

The case arose when a show cause notice was issued to the appellant, proposing a demand for Central Excise Duty on the gold coins, which was later confirmed by an order that imposed a 1% duty on the grounds that the coins were branded. However, the Tribunal found that the gold coins were eligible for excise duty exemption as the house mark does not qualify as a brand name. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the demand for duty, affirming that the mark on the gold coins was intended only to indicate the manufacturer, not to serve as a brand name or trade name.