https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81686 The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) held that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 due to affixing goods with a brand name belonging to another person. However, the Tribunal determined that the use of the brand name did not disentitle the appellants from the exemption as the goods were traded under a different name. As the marketing agency did not manufacture the goods or hold a brand name, the appellants were deemed eligible for the exemption. Despite differing opinions, the majority decision led to the rejection of the appeal. en-us Wed, 12 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 12:13:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81686 The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) held that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 due to affixing goods with a brand name belonging to another person. However, the Tribunal determined that the use of the brand name did not disentitle the appellants from the exemption as the goods were traded under a different name. As the marketing agency did not manufacture the goods or hold a brand name, the appellants were deemed eligible for the exemption. Despite differing opinions, the majority decision led to the rejection of the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81686