https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291797 Duty on jewellery arises only where a brand name or trade name is indelibly affixed or embossed and, on the facts, the mark is used in trade to indicate a commercial connection with the assessee. The Tribunal noted that earlier decisions on branded jewellery were not inconsistent in principle because they turned on different factual settings, including mere initials used as identifiers and replacement of established brands with new marks. Applying the same fact-specific test, it held that a mere identification mark or house mark used by job workers or for internal identification does not automatically constitute branding; whether the article is marketed and sold under that mark is decisive. en-us Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:21:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291797 Duty on jewellery arises only where a brand name or trade name is indelibly affixed or embossed and, on the facts, the mark is used in trade to indicate a commercial connection with the assessee. The Tribunal noted that earlier decisions on branded jewellery were not inconsistent in principle because they turned on different factual settings, including mere initials used as identifiers and replacement of established brands with new marks. Applying the same fact-specific test, it held that a mere identification mark or house mark used by job workers or for internal identification does not automatically constitute branding; whether the article is marketed and sold under that mark is decisive. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291797