<?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>2002 (10) TMI 800 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280516</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI ruled in favor of M/s. Ultraseal (I) Ltd., affirming their eligibility for the Small Scale Exemption under Notification No. 1/93. The Tribunal held that the logo used by the Indian company was not identical or deceptively similar to that of the foreign collaborator. Additionally, the certificate disowning the logo issued by the foreign company supported the Indian company&#039;s exclusive right to use the logo. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between identical and deceptively similar trademarks, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upholding the Indian company&#039;s entitlement to the exemption notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 May 2019 14:38:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 800 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280516</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI ruled in favor of M/s. Ultraseal (I) Ltd., affirming their eligibility for the Small Scale Exemption under Notification No. 1/93. The Tribunal held that the logo used by the Indian company was not identical or deceptively similar to that of the foreign collaborator. Additionally, the certificate disowning the logo issued by the foreign company supported the Indian company&#039;s exclusive right to use the logo. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between identical and deceptively similar trademarks, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upholding the Indian company&#039;s entitlement to the exemption notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>