<?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>2017 (3) TMI 648 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340145</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal, granting relief to the assessee-Appellants in a case involving the use of the brand name &#039;SHEETAL&#039; without authorization, denial of SSI benefit, suppression of facts, and reduction of duty demand and penalty. The Tribunal considered the fabrication activities, turnover, and ownership of the brand name, ultimately allowing the appeals and providing consequential relief to the assessee-Appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Nov 2017 16:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461313" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 648 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340145</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal, granting relief to the assessee-Appellants in a case involving the use of the brand name &#039;SHEETAL&#039; without authorization, denial of SSI benefit, suppression of facts, and reduction of duty demand and penalty. The Tribunal considered the fabrication activities, turnover, and ownership of the brand name, ultimately allowing the appeals and providing consequential relief to the assessee-Appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>