https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50577 Notification No. 175/86-C.E. excludes exemption only where the specified goods bear the brand name or trade name of another person who is not eligible for the exemption. The burden is on the Revenue to prove that the goods were actually so affixed. On the facts discussed, the evidence was general and not specific to PT-81, and cross-examination of the Range Superintendent supported the assessee's case that PT-81 did not bear the expression "LMS". In the absence of direct evidence that the goods carried another person's brand name, the exclusion was not attracted and the exemption could not be denied on that basis. en-us Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:50:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50577 Notification No. 175/86-C.E. excludes exemption only where the specified goods bear the brand name or trade name of another person who is not eligible for the exemption. The burden is on the Revenue to prove that the goods were actually so affixed. On the facts discussed, the evidence was general and not specific to PT-81, and cross-examination of the Range Superintendent supported the assessee's case that PT-81 did not bear the expression "LMS". In the absence of direct evidence that the goods carried another person's brand name, the exclusion was not attracted and the exemption could not be denied on that basis. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50577