2019 (2) TMI 1415

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For Appellant: Mr. N.K. Oza (Advocate) For Respondent: Mr. K.J. Kinariwala (A.R.) ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair The issue involved in the present case is that whether different firm of Family members using same brand name i.e. "Vivek" are eligible for SSI Exemption Notification No.8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003. 2. Shri. P.V. Sheth, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in respect of Revenue's appeal. As regard the Revenue's appeal, he submits that since there is no evidence supporting the claim of the appellant that certain consignment for exporting through third person, the same should be included in the aggregate clearances for the purpose of computing the SSI limit. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the recor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... son. In the facts all the assessees are owner of 'Vivek' brand. Therefore, all are eligible for SSI exemption Notification No. 8/2003-CE. In the case of Shreeji Enterprise (Supra) this Tribunal has held that when Trade Mark is used by various family members of one family then it cannot be said that the brand name used by any one belongs to another person. The present case is on better footing that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X