https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206194 Small scale exemption was unavailable where the manufacturer used another person's brand name or trade name. The evidence showed identical branding, marking style and packing material, no manufacturer name on the goods or packing, and admissions indicating common management and a shared market identity. On that basis, the brand was treated as indicating a trade connection with the other unit rather than a merely descriptive mark. The later claim that the brand was used only from 01.06.2004 was rejected because contemporaneous records pointed to prior use. Demand, penalty and confiscation were upheld. en-us Fri, 13 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jun 2013 18:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206194 Small scale exemption was unavailable where the manufacturer used another person's brand name or trade name. The evidence showed identical branding, marking style and packing material, no manufacturer name on the goods or packing, and admissions indicating common management and a shared market identity. On that basis, the brand was treated as indicating a trade connection with the other unit rather than a merely descriptive mark. The later claim that the brand was used only from 01.06.2004 was rejected because contemporaneous records pointed to prior use. Demand, penalty and confiscation were upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206194