<?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>2018 (6) TMI 119 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361292</link>
    <description>Use of a partner&#039;s surname does not amount to use of another person&#039;s brand name for denying small scale industry exemption. Where the mark &quot;Kohli&quot; was shown to be the surname of one of the assessee&#039;s partners, the allegation that the unit had adopted a third party brand name failed, and the proposed denial of exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE was unsustainable. The assessee was therefore entitled to the SSI benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2018 23:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 119 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361292</link>
      <description>Use of a partner&#039;s surname does not amount to use of another person&#039;s brand name for denying small scale industry exemption. Where the mark &quot;Kohli&quot; was shown to be the surname of one of the assessee&#039;s partners, the allegation that the unit had adopted a third party brand name failed, and the proposed denial of exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE was unsustainable. The assessee was therefore entitled to the SSI benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361292</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>