https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92693 Mere mention of a foreign collaborator's or marketing company's name on a product label does not, by itself, amount to use of another person's brand name. The labels were treated as house marks identifying the technology supplier and marketer, not as symbols, monograms, invented words, or other devices constituting a brand name under Notification No. 175/86. On that basis, the small scale industry exemption remained available, and denial of SSI benefit was unsustainable. The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief as permissible in law. en-us Mon, 28 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:22:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92693 Mere mention of a foreign collaborator's or marketing company's name on a product label does not, by itself, amount to use of another person's brand name. The labels were treated as house marks identifying the technology supplier and marketer, not as symbols, monograms, invented words, or other devices constituting a brand name under Notification No. 175/86. On that basis, the small scale industry exemption remained available, and denial of SSI benefit was unsustainable. The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief as permissible in law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92693