https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123433 Use of wording on goods indicating that they were manufactured by a subsidiary was treated as use of the holding company's brand name or trade name, making the small-scale industry exemption unavailable on merits. However, because the legal position on such wording was unsettled during the relevant period and the assessee's belief was bona fide, suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. The extended period of limitation was therefore not invocable, and penalty could not be sustained. The demand failed on limitation even though the exemption claim was rejected on merits. en-us Tue, 04 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:54:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123433 Use of wording on goods indicating that they were manufactured by a subsidiary was treated as use of the holding company's brand name or trade name, making the small-scale industry exemption unavailable on merits. However, because the legal position on such wording was unsettled during the relevant period and the assessee's belief was bona fide, suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. The extended period of limitation was therefore not invocable, and penalty could not be sustained. The demand failed on limitation even though the exemption claim was rejected on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123433