https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83261 Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was treated as unavailable where another person's brand name was embossed on castings used captively to manufacture the final specified goods, because paragraph 7 and Explanation VIII were applied on the basis that the brand identified a trade connection with the brand owner. The stage at which embossing occurred was held immaterial to the exclusion clause once the final goods carried the brand connection. On limitation, the record was considered insufficient for a final finding on conscious suppression and the effect of departmental verification, so the larger-period issue was remanded to the original authority for de novo adjudication. en-us Fri, 13 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:06:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83261 Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was treated as unavailable where another person's brand name was embossed on castings used captively to manufacture the final specified goods, because paragraph 7 and Explanation VIII were applied on the basis that the brand identified a trade connection with the brand owner. The stage at which embossing occurred was held immaterial to the exclusion clause once the final goods carried the brand connection. On limitation, the record was considered insufficient for a final finding on conscious suppression and the effect of departmental verification, so the larger-period issue was remanded to the original authority for de novo adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83261