https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253894 Use of another manufacturer's brand name does not by itself bar small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-CE; the decisive question is whether the brand name owner was itself eligible for the exemption during the relevant period. A distinction based only on visual presentation or partial use of the brand name is insufficient to preserve the claim where the brand name otherwise belongs to another. Here, the brand name owner was a registered small scale unit, and exempt clearances were not to be included in aggregate value for eligibility purposes. On that statutory scheme, the owner was not ineligible, so the respondent could not be denied the exemption merely for using that brand name. en-us Wed, 03 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2015 16:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253894 Use of another manufacturer's brand name does not by itself bar small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-CE; the decisive question is whether the brand name owner was itself eligible for the exemption during the relevant period. A distinction based only on visual presentation or partial use of the brand name is insufficient to preserve the claim where the brand name otherwise belongs to another. Here, the brand name owner was a registered small scale unit, and exempt clearances were not to be included in aggregate value for eligibility purposes. On that statutory scheme, the owner was not ineligible, so the respondent could not be denied the exemption merely for using that brand name. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253894