<?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>2004 (6) TMI 385 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111998</link>
    <description>SSI exemption was available where the manufacturer had consistently used its own trade name, &quot;Anutone&quot;, and the Revenue failed to prove that it was another person&#039;s brand name. Copyright registration for artistic or literary material did not establish ownership of a market trade mark or brand name, and copyright in artwork was treated as distinct from trade name rights. On that footing, denial of small scale industry benefit was unsustainable, and the confirmed duty, interest and penalties also could not survive. The exemption was therefore held admissible and the consequential demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 385 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111998</link>
      <description>SSI exemption was available where the manufacturer had consistently used its own trade name, &quot;Anutone&quot;, and the Revenue failed to prove that it was another person&#039;s brand name. Copyright registration for artistic or literary material did not establish ownership of a market trade mark or brand name, and copyright in artwork was treated as distinct from trade name rights. On that footing, denial of small scale industry benefit was unsustainable, and the confirmed duty, interest and penalties also could not survive. The exemption was therefore held admissible and the consequential demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111998</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>