https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76489 Statutorily required disclosure of a packer's name and complete address on retail packages of refined palmolein did not, by itself, amount to use of a brand name. The exemption for refined edible oils in unit containers was therefore not denied, because the label merely identified the packer as required by food packaging rules and did not indicate any trade connection or commercial brand associated with the product. Reliance on a Supreme Court decision was held inapposite due to its different context and wider definition of brand name. The clearances were not treated as branded refined edible oil, and exemption was sustained. en-us Mon, 13 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76489 Statutorily required disclosure of a packer's name and complete address on retail packages of refined palmolein did not, by itself, amount to use of a brand name. The exemption for refined edible oils in unit containers was therefore not denied, because the label merely identified the packer as required by food packaging rules and did not indicate any trade connection or commercial brand associated with the product. Reliance on a Supreme Court decision was held inapposite due to its different context and wider definition of brand name. The clearances were not treated as branded refined edible oil, and exemption was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76489