https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342952 Goods bearing the brand name or trade name of another person were held ineligible for small scale exemption because the assessee used the sister concern's logo and mark under a commercial arrangement, and the jointly owned brand exception did not apply. The product classification adopted in adjudication was upheld because most items were not seriously disputed and no infirmity was shown. The extended limitation period was sustained since the assessee had not disclosed the true nature of manufacture and clearance, had not obtained excise registration, and had withheld material facts. The duty demand, personal penalty, and confiscation were maintained, but the overlapping corporate penalty under the erstwhile penal rule was set aside. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 May 2017 06:50:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342952 Goods bearing the brand name or trade name of another person were held ineligible for small scale exemption because the assessee used the sister concern's logo and mark under a commercial arrangement, and the jointly owned brand exception did not apply. The product classification adopted in adjudication was upheld because most items were not seriously disputed and no infirmity was shown. The extended limitation period was sustained since the assessee had not disclosed the true nature of manufacture and clearance, had not obtained excise registration, and had withheld material facts. The duty demand, personal penalty, and confiscation were maintained, but the overlapping corporate penalty under the erstwhile penal rule was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342952