https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334075 Eligibility for concessional duty under Notification No. 06/2002-CE depended on whether the relevant installed capacity crossed the prescribed limit and whether the brand name condition was breached. The grinding mill capacity was treated as the relevant installed capacity for the cement plant, and the department failed to prove that the threshold was exceeded; the assessee was therefore not disqualified on capacity grounds. The finding that the assessee had used the mark earlier than the other concern, and that partial use of a similar mark by another unit did not amount to use of another person's brand name, meant no violation of the brand name condition was established. The departmental challenge failed and the proceedings remained dropped. en-us Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334075 Eligibility for concessional duty under Notification No. 06/2002-CE depended on whether the relevant installed capacity crossed the prescribed limit and whether the brand name condition was breached. The grinding mill capacity was treated as the relevant installed capacity for the cement plant, and the department failed to prove that the threshold was exceeded; the assessee was therefore not disqualified on capacity grounds. The finding that the assessee had used the mark earlier than the other concern, and that partial use of a similar mark by another unit did not amount to use of another person's brand name, meant no violation of the brand name condition was established. The departmental challenge failed and the proceedings remained dropped. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334075