https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353686 SSI exemption under Notification No. 08/2003-CE was available where the brand name used by the appellant had originally belonged to the predecessor partnership concern, whose partners later became the directors of the successor company, and the brand was later assigned to the appellant. On those facts, the brand could not be treated as belonging to another person for the purpose of denying exemption. Extended limitation was also unavailable because the use of the brand name had been disclosed in departmental records and the Revenue had notice of the relevant facts, so no suppression was established. The demand, interest and penalties were therefore set aside, with consequential relief. en-us Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:21:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353686 SSI exemption under Notification No. 08/2003-CE was available where the brand name used by the appellant had originally belonged to the predecessor partnership concern, whose partners later became the directors of the successor company, and the brand was later assigned to the appellant. On those facts, the brand could not be treated as belonging to another person for the purpose of denying exemption. Extended limitation was also unavailable because the use of the brand name had been disclosed in departmental records and the Revenue had notice of the relevant facts, so no suppression was established. The demand, interest and penalties were therefore set aside, with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353686