2016 (10) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Respondent ORDER The appeal of the revenue is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. BR(2668)50/MI/2005 dated 23/02/2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Mumbai Zone-I, wherein the Ld. Commissioner allowed the appeal of the respondent by setting aside the Order-in-Original No. 06/2004 dated 11/08/2004. 2.  The fact of the case is that the respondent is enga....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ggrieved by the Order-in-Original, the respondent filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the S.S.I. exemption Notification No. 8/2001-CE dtd. 01-03-2001 on the ground that after assignment of brand to the respondent, the respondent became the owner of the brand. Therefore, it cannot be said they have used brand name of another person. 3.  Shri V.K. Shastri, Ld. A.C.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... using the brand name of another person and accordingly not entitled for the S.S.I. exemption Notification No. 8/2001-CE dtd. 01-03-2001 or otherwise. 5.1  We find that as regard assignment agreement, there is no dispute in the facts of legal assignment of the brand in favour of the respondent vide agreement dated 01-04-2001.  Therefore, agreement stands legal and in force.  Ld. ....