https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173428 SSI exemption under Notification SRO 8/1999 was not denied merely because ice cream was sold under the brand name "Summer Treat". The decisive factual finding was that the brand name was jointly owned by the unit and another person, and the product was marketed under that shared brand in exclusive territories. On that basis, the unit was treated as a co-owner of the brand name, so the condition barring use of another person's brand name was not attracted. The exemption was therefore available, and no interference was called for. en-us Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Sep 2017 09:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173428 SSI exemption under Notification SRO 8/1999 was not denied merely because ice cream was sold under the brand name "Summer Treat". The decisive factual finding was that the brand name was jointly owned by the unit and another person, and the product was marketed under that shared brand in exclusive territories. On that basis, the unit was treated as a co-owner of the brand name, so the condition barring use of another person's brand name was not attracted. The exemption was therefore available, and no interference was called for. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173428