<?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>2023 (4) TMI 599 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436573</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the SSI exemption under Notification No. 08/2003 Central Excise as they were not using another person&#039;s brand name. The logos used by the appellant were distinct and registered under their own trademark, establishing ownership. Therefore, the appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the impugned order denying the exemption was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:04:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 599 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436573</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the SSI exemption under Notification No. 08/2003 Central Excise as they were not using another person&#039;s brand name. The logos used by the appellant were distinct and registered under their own trademark, establishing ownership. Therefore, the appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the impugned order denying the exemption was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>