SSI exemption barred for branded goods manufactured under another person's brand name; duty demand and penalty restored.

Small scale industry exemption is unavailable where goods are manufactured and cleared under another person's brand name. An unchallenged statement on record showed that the assessee supplied branded goods for a different concern, and a bare denial was insufficient to displace that evidence. The commentary notes that, under the Supreme Court's view, registration of the brand name in the owner's name is not required, and exemption remains barred even if the brand owner manufactures different goods. On that basis, the duty demand and penalty were to be restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to small scale industry exemption when the goods were manufactured and cleared under a brand name belonging to another person.

Analysis: The unchallenged statement on record established that the assessee was manufacturing and supplying goods under the brand name of another concern. A mere denial by the assessee could not displace this evidence. The earlier view relied upon by the appellate authority was inconsistent with the law declared by the Supreme Court, which held that registration of the brand name in the owner's name is not necessary and that exemption is unavailable where branded goods are manufactured under another person's brand name, even if the owner manufactures different goods.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to the SSI exemption, and the duty demand and penalty were liable to be restored.

---