https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387400 The Tribunal held that the appellant, a HUF Proprietor Firm using the brand name 'Laxmen' in manufacturing excisable goods, was entitled to the SSI exemption. Despite another unit owned by a family member also using the same brand name, it was established that both units belonged to the same family, and thus, the appellant could claim the exemption. The decision emphasized familial ownership as a crucial factor in determining brand name usage for exemption eligibility. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:05:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387400 The Tribunal held that the appellant, a HUF Proprietor Firm using the brand name 'Laxmen' in manufacturing excisable goods, was entitled to the SSI exemption. Despite another unit owned by a family member also using the same brand name, it was established that both units belonged to the same family, and thus, the appellant could claim the exemption. The decision emphasized familial ownership as a crucial factor in determining brand name usage for exemption eligibility. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387400