<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (10) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE (MADRAS)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=710</link>
    <description>Small Scale Industry exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was unavailable where the goods carried the monogram and label of another concern and were sold as &quot;Marketed by&quot; that concern. The exemption excluded specified goods bearing the brand name of another person, and the Court treated the markings as more than a mere house mark. On that basis, the statutory bar applied and the denial of SSI benefit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40155" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE (MADRAS)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=710</link>
      <description>Small Scale Industry exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was unavailable where the goods carried the monogram and label of another concern and were sold as &quot;Marketed by&quot; that concern. The exemption excluded specified goods bearing the brand name of another person, and the Court treated the markings as more than a mere house mark. On that basis, the statutory bar applied and the denial of SSI benefit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>