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

..... l 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 engaged in the manufacture of readymade garmen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pondent 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. (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue rei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rdingly 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. Commissioner (Appeals) held the admissibility of e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X