SSI exemption and brand name use: foreign-sounding marks do not disqualify an assessee absent proof of another's ownership and trade connection.

Small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. is not denied merely because an assessee uses an international or foreign-sounding brand name. The relevant test is whether the mark indicates a connection in the course of trade with another person and whether ownership of the brand name is identified and established. Applying the Board's clarification and circular, disqualification requires proof that the brand belongs to someone else and that the statutory connection criterion is satisfied. On the stated facts, the Revenue did not establish ownership of the alleged brand names or the basis for exclusion from the exemption.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was entitled to the small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. despite use of alleged foreign brand names.

Analysis: Denial of SSI exemption on use of another's brand name depends on whether the mark indicates a connection in the course of trade with some other person, whether ownership of the brand name is ascertained and established, and whether the brand is in fact owned by a particular person. Applying the Board's clarification and circular, mere use of an international or foreign-sounding brand name does not by itself disentitle the assessee unless the brand name is shown to belong to another person and the requisite connection is established. On the facts, the Revenue failed to establish ownership of the alleged brand names or the basis for disqualification.

Conclusion: The respondent was not disentitled to SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E.; the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: SSI exemption cannot be denied for use of a brand name unless the brand is shown to belong to another person and a connection in the course of trade is established in accordance with the governing criteria.

---