<?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 (8) TMI 1047 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346989</link>
    <description>Clearances of aluminium ingots bearing the mark &quot;R K I&quot; were held not to lose small-scale industry exemption merely because the mark appeared on the goods. The exemption is barred only when the mark is shown to be the brand name or trade name of another person and is used to indicate a trade connection with that person. On the record, there was no proof that &quot;R K I&quot; belonged to another entity, no evidence of invoicing or marketing in another&#039;s name, no showing that the unit was a dummy concern, and no customer evidence of such association. The duty demand and penalties therefore could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:00:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1047 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346989</link>
      <description>Clearances of aluminium ingots bearing the mark &quot;R K I&quot; were held not to lose small-scale industry exemption merely because the mark appeared on the goods. The exemption is barred only when the mark is shown to be the brand name or trade name of another person and is used to indicate a trade connection with that person. On the record, there was no proof that &quot;R K I&quot; belonged to another entity, no evidence of invoicing or marketing in another&#039;s name, no showing that the unit was a dummy concern, and no customer evidence of such association. The duty demand and penalties therefore could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>