https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50417 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was available for goods bearing the brand name "Shah Trumpelt" because the department did not disprove that the mark belonged to a small-scale unit eligible for the notification. Goods bearing "LMS" were treated as branded goods, and exemption was denied because no reliable evidence showed the earlier user was eligible; non-disclosure also justified invocation of the extended limitation period. Common directors, exclusive supply to the marketing company, interest-free advances, and reimbursement of selling-related expenses established mutuality of interest and financial flow back, supporting related-person status. Penalty was upheld, but reduced in view of relief granted on the Shah Trumpelt clearances. en-us Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:46:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50417 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was available for goods bearing the brand name "Shah Trumpelt" because the department did not disprove that the mark belonged to a small-scale unit eligible for the notification. Goods bearing "LMS" were treated as branded goods, and exemption was denied because no reliable evidence showed the earlier user was eligible; non-disclosure also justified invocation of the extended limitation period. Common directors, exclusive supply to the marketing company, interest-free advances, and reimbursement of selling-related expenses established mutuality of interest and financial flow back, supporting related-person status. Penalty was upheld, but reduced in view of relief granted on the Shah Trumpelt clearances. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50417