<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1998 (5) TMI 110 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89038</link>
    <description>Affixation of the mark &quot;Swift&quot; on excisable goods, together with sale through M/s. Swift Sales and Service, was treated as use of a trade name in the course of trade. The surrounding commercial association between the mark and that concern brought the goods within the exclusion in paragraph 7 of Notification No. 175/86-CE. The later abandonment of the mark did not change the character of its earlier use. The exemption was therefore unavailable, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:29:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (5) TMI 110 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89038</link>
      <description>Affixation of the mark &quot;Swift&quot; on excisable goods, together with sale through M/s. Swift Sales and Service, was treated as use of a trade name in the course of trade. The surrounding commercial association between the mark and that concern brought the goods within the exclusion in paragraph 7 of Notification No. 175/86-CE. The later abandonment of the mark did not change the character of its earlier use. The exemption was therefore unavailable, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>