https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176764 The appellant was denied the benefit of exemption under notification no. 12/94 for a specific period due to increased power load. However, they were deemed entitled to exemptions under SSI-related notifications as they proved ownership of the brand name in question. The clubbing of clearances between the appellant and another entity was rejected due to lack of evidence of mutual interest. Penalties were not imposed, and the appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 18 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176764 The appellant was denied the benefit of exemption under notification no. 12/94 for a specific period due to increased power load. However, they were deemed entitled to exemptions under SSI-related notifications as they proved ownership of the brand name in question. The clubbing of clearances between the appellant and another entity was rejected due to lack of evidence of mutual interest. Penalties were not imposed, and the appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176764