9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03-2001 or otherwise - Held 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. Therefore, agreement stands legal and in force. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held the admissibility of exemption notification relying on the judgment of Collector of C.Ex., Ahmedabad vs Vikshara Trading & Invest P. Ltd. [200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 engaged in the manufacture of readymade garments falling under Chapter 62 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondent entered into agreement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. 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. (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterating the ground of appeal submits that even though the S.S.I. exemption agreement into for transfer of brand but still b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssignment 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. Commissioner (Appeals) held the admissibility of exemption notification relying on the judgment of Collector of C.Ex., Ahmedabad vs Vikshara Trading Invest P. Ltd. - 2003 (157) ELT 4 (SC), wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
