https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333116 Small scale exemption denial on alleged use of another's brand name required a fresh factual examination of whether there was a real trade nexus between the mark, the goods and the person relied upon by the Department; mere third-party registration was not treated as conclusive. The Tribunal also held that extended limitation and penalties could not be sustained where the assessee acted under a bona fide belief, there was no convincing proof of wilful suppression or misstatement, and the disputed brand use was already within departmental knowledge. The time-barred demands and penalties were set aside, while the brand-name and cum-duty issues were remanded for reconsideration. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Dec 2016 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333116 Small scale exemption denial on alleged use of another's brand name required a fresh factual examination of whether there was a real trade nexus between the mark, the goods and the person relied upon by the Department; mere third-party registration was not treated as conclusive. The Tribunal also held that extended limitation and penalties could not be sustained where the assessee acted under a bona fide belief, there was no convincing proof of wilful suppression or misstatement, and the disputed brand use was already within departmental knowledge. The time-barred demands and penalties were set aside, while the brand-name and cum-duty issues were remanded for reconsideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333116