SSI exemption denied for brand name use fails where "New Rose" is distinct from "Rose" and no other's mark is used.

SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93 could not be denied on the ground of use of another person's brand name where the mark used by the assessee was "New Rose" and not "Rose". On examination of the invoices and surrounding facts, the Tribunal found the two marks materially different and held that the assessee was not using the brand name of another person. The denial of the exemption was therefore not sustainable, and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether denial of small scale industry exemption was justified on the ground that the assessee used the brand name of another person.

Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 1/93 was denied on the footing that the goods bore the brand name "Rose" belonging to others. On examination of the invoices and surrounding facts, the name used by the assessee was found to be "New Rose". The Tribunal held that "New Rose" was different from "Rose" and, therefore, the assessee could not be said to be using the brand name of another person. The plea of the assessee was also supported by the cited precedent on use of a different and not identical mark.

Conclusion: The denial of SSI exemption was not sustainable and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---