https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106957 Use of another person's logo, symbols or marks on packing material and on a ribbon attached to mattresses was treated as use of that person's brand name or trade name, so SSI exemption was denied. The argument that the marks were only a house mark was rejected because that concept was not shown to apply to mattresses. A separately pleaded claim for nil-rate duty exemption under successor notifications had not been examined on merits and could not be refused merely because SSI exemption was originally sought, so that claim and the consequential duty and penalty issues were remanded for fresh consideration. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106957 Use of another person's logo, symbols or marks on packing material and on a ribbon attached to mattresses was treated as use of that person's brand name or trade name, so SSI exemption was denied. The argument that the marks were only a house mark was rejected because that concept was not shown to apply to mattresses. A separately pleaded claim for nil-rate duty exemption under successor notifications had not been examined on merits and could not be refused merely because SSI exemption was originally sought, so that claim and the consequential duty and penalty issues were remanded for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106957