https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52224 Plain initials placed on excisable goods were examined to determine whether they functioned as a brand name or trade name under the exemption notification. The test applied was whether the mark indicated a commercial connection in trade; simple initials used only as identification marks did not ordinarily satisfy that test, so the markings were not treated as a brand name or trade name. Extended limitation under section 11A also depended on suppression or misstatement, and it was not available where correspondence and samples had already disclosed that only buyer initials were used. The matter was remanded for fresh determination of duty, credit, abatement, and penalty. en-us Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2010 12:36:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52224 Plain initials placed on excisable goods were examined to determine whether they functioned as a brand name or trade name under the exemption notification. The test applied was whether the mark indicated a commercial connection in trade; simple initials used only as identification marks did not ordinarily satisfy that test, so the markings were not treated as a brand name or trade name. Extended limitation under section 11A also depended on suppression or misstatement, and it was not available where correspondence and samples had already disclosed that only buyer initials were used. The matter was remanded for fresh determination of duty, credit, abatement, and penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52224