TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 924X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri P.V. Seth, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.K. Mall, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Two issues are involved in the present appeal. Demand of duty of Rs. 64,025/- stands confirmed against the appellants along with imposition of penalty of Rs 10,000/- on account of amortized cost of dies and moulds used in the manufacture of castings, is required to be added in the assessable v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Memorandum of Understanding entered between various family members, the said brand name did not belong to any one person but was to be used by all the three parties. In these circumstances, to hold that it was belonging to another person, thus debarring the use of the same by the appellant would be against the factual position. It is well settled that for denying the benefit of small scale exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein it was held that trade mark belonging to a partnership firm, which was dissolved, can belong to all the partners upon dissolving of the firm and can be used by each party in respect of any goods under the agreement, and the same would not attract mischief of Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. or Para 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. 3. In view of the above, we hold that confirmation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
