Small scale exemption and brand name restriction: Revenue must prove goods actually bore another person's trade mark to deny relief.

Small scale exemption under Notification No. 8/99-C.E. could not be denied merely because tiles were printed and decorated to customer specifications. The exemption applied only where the goods bore the brand name or trade name of another person, and the Revenue was required to prove that connection. On the record, the appellants purchased plain tiles as raw material and processed them themselves, but there was no proof that the cleared goods bore another person's brand name or that there was any trade connection with such person. The position was also distinguished from job work on goods supplied already bearing a customer's brand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of small scale exemption under Notification No. 8/99-C.E. dated 01.03.1999 could be denied on the ground that the goods bore the brand name of another person.

Analysis: The relevant notification excluded specified goods bearing the brand name or trade name of another person. The materials on record showed that the appellants purchased plain tiles as raw material and carried out printing and decoration on them according to customer specifications. The Revenue failed to establish that the tiles, after such processing, were being cleared as goods bearing any brand name of another person or that there was any connection in the course of trade between the goods and another person using such name. The circumstances were also distinguished from cases involving job work on goods supplied bearing the customer's brand.

Conclusion: The exemption could not be denied, as the Revenue did not prove that the manufactured goods bore the brand name of another person.

---