Small-scale industry exemption survives where brand name differs and the goods manufactured are different, despite a brand-name objection.

Small-scale industries exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. could not be denied where the assessee's brand name was found to be different from the alleged rival brand and the goods manufactured by the two concerns were also different. On those factual findings, the case did not attract para 4 of the notification, and there was no material to disturb the record-based conclusion. The Larger Bench principle applied was that a brand-name objection does not defeat exemption when the goods are different. The exemption was therefore upheld and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of small scale industries exemption could be denied on the ground that the assessee used the brand name "Bhalla Fine", alleged to be similar to another person's brand name, when the goods manufactured were different.

Analysis: The authorities below had found that the brand name used by the assessee was different from the other brand name and that the goods manufactured by the two concerns were also different. On those findings, the case did not fall within the mischief of para 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. The record did not disclose any material to disturb those findings of fact, and the principle applied by the Larger Bench was that exemption cannot be denied where the goods are different, even if a brand-name allegation is made.

Conclusion: The exemption was rightly allowed to the assessee and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---