SSI exemption and brand name use: exclusion applies only when branded goods are identical to the brand owner's goods.

A small scale unit was not denied SSI exemption merely because it used another person's brand name on goods different from those manufactured by the brand owner. The exclusion in paragraph 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. applied only where the SSI unit cleared specified goods under another's brand name in the manner contemplated by the notification, requiring a trade nexus between the branded goods and goods identical to those of the brand owner. The Revenue had the burden to show that the goods fell within the exclusionary clause, and mere use of another's brand name was insufficient. The unit therefore remained entitled to SSI exemption.

---

---

Issues: Whether the bar in paragraph 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. applied where a small scale unit used another person's brand name on goods different from those manufactured by the brand name owner, and whether such use disentitled the unit to SSI exemption.

Analysis: The applicable notification excluded exemption only when the specified goods manufactured by the SSI unit were cleared under the brand name or trade name of another person in the manner contemplated by the notification. The reasoning treated the expression indicating connection in the course of trade as requiring a nexus between the branded goods of the SSI unit and goods identical to those of the brand name owner, so that the goods would be indistinguishable in the market. The burden remained on the Revenue to bring the goods within the exclusionary clause, and the mere fact that another person's brand name was used did not by itself establish that the brand name owner was manufacturing the same specified goods.

Conclusion: The use of another person's brand name on goods different from those of the brand name owner did not attract the bar in paragraph 4, and the respondents remained entitled to SSI exemption.

---