https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279153 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed both appeals concerning the denial of SSI exemption for using another brand name. It was found that the appellant's use of the brand name was part of job work exclusively for another company, with no sales to third parties, leading to the conclusion that the brand name usage was not for the appellant's benefit but part of the job work/business. The Tribunal considered the period in dispute and the appellant's exclusive manufacturing for the other company in reaching this decision. en-us Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Mar 2019 06:32:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279153 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed both appeals concerning the denial of SSI exemption for using another brand name. It was found that the appellant's use of the brand name was part of job work exclusively for another company, with no sales to third parties, leading to the conclusion that the brand name usage was not for the appellant's benefit but part of the job work/business. The Tribunal considered the period in dispute and the appellant's exclusive manufacturing for the other company in reaching this decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279153