https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240241 Use of the mark "AVON" by family-run partnership concerns did not, on these facts, bar small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. because no third-party ownership of the brand name was established; the exemption was therefore available and denial of benefit was unsustainable. The extended limitation period also could not be invoked, as the appellants had filed the required declarations and there was no proof of deliberate suppression of brand ownership with intent to evade duty. The demand was accordingly time-barred, and the duty demand was set aside on both merits and limitation. en-us Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jan 2014 16:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240241 Use of the mark "AVON" by family-run partnership concerns did not, on these facts, bar small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. because no third-party ownership of the brand name was established; the exemption was therefore available and denial of benefit was unsustainable. The extended limitation period also could not be invoked, as the appellants had filed the required declarations and there was no proof of deliberate suppression of brand ownership with intent to evade duty. The demand was accordingly time-barred, and the duty demand was set aside on both merits and limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240241