https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52036 An exemption notification that defines "brand name" and "trade name" itself bars small-scale exemption where the goods bear another person's brand, whether registered or unregistered. The excise authorities need not first decide ownership under trade mark law, and concurrent use does not overcome the notification's express disqualification. On limitation, suppression was found because the appellants knew the brands belonged to another entity but did not fully disclose that position to the Department; the extended period was therefore available. Penalty was moderated on the facts, with the amount reduced. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Sep 2010 12:27:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52036 An exemption notification that defines "brand name" and "trade name" itself bars small-scale exemption where the goods bear another person's brand, whether registered or unregistered. The excise authorities need not first decide ownership under trade mark law, and concurrent use does not overcome the notification's express disqualification. On limitation, suppression was found because the appellants knew the brands belonged to another entity but did not fully disclose that position to the Department; the extended period was therefore available. Penalty was moderated on the facts, with the amount reduced. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52036