https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114074 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants for aiding and abetting a manufacturer in supplying components for "Flex Box" production. The goods seized bearing the supplier's brand name were not eligible for confiscation under the SSI Benefit notification. The tribunal ruled that there was no prohibition under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for manufacturing goods with another's brand name. Consequently, the appellants' penalty under Rule 209A was annulled due to lack of grounds for their liability, leading to the allowance of their appeals. en-us Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 May 2012 10:08:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114074 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants for aiding and abetting a manufacturer in supplying components for "Flex Box" production. The goods seized bearing the supplier's brand name were not eligible for confiscation under the SSI Benefit notification. The tribunal ruled that there was no prohibition under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for manufacturing goods with another's brand name. Consequently, the appellants' penalty under Rule 209A was annulled due to lack of grounds for their liability, leading to the allowance of their appeals. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114074