https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107385 A marking used only to identify the vehicle for which brake shoes were meant did not amount to use of another person's brand name, so the small-scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was available. The finding of clandestine removal was, however, sustained because seized records, statements and later corroborative material supported suppression of actual clearances. Duty was therefore remanded for fresh computation, with the assessees allowed to place material on exports and penalty. Confiscation was not sustained because the goods were not found to bear another person's brand name. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:16:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107385 A marking used only to identify the vehicle for which brake shoes were meant did not amount to use of another person's brand name, so the small-scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was available. The finding of clandestine removal was, however, sustained because seized records, statements and later corroborative material supported suppression of actual clearances. Duty was therefore remanded for fresh computation, with the assessees allowed to place material on exports and penalty. Confiscation was not sustained because the goods were not found to bear another person's brand name. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107385