Brand name exemption denied where the mark created a connection with another person, even without every linguistic form reproduced.

A review order was found to be within limitation because the finalised order had been signed by the Member (L & J) on 8-12-1995, so the Revenue's appeal was maintainable. On the substantive exemption issue, goods cleared with the Maruti logo and the word "MARUTI" below it were treated as bearing a brand mark that created a clear connection in the purchaser's mind with M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd.; the omission of the word in Devanagari script did not matter. Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was therefore attracted, and the small scale industry exemption was unavailable on those clearances.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the Board's review order was barred by limitation and the Revenue's appeal was maintainable; and (ii) whether goods cleared with the Maruti logo and the word "MARUTI" below it were hit by para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., disentitling the assessee to small scale industry exemption.

Issue (i): whether the Board's review order was barred by limitation and the Revenue's appeal was maintainable.

Analysis: The original records showed that the Member (L & J) had signed the finalised review order on 8-12-1995 itself. The review was therefore within the prescribed period and the preliminary objection on limitation failed.

Conclusion: The review order was within limitation and the Revenue's appeal was maintainable.

Issue (ii): whether goods cleared with the Maruti logo and the word "MARUTI" below it were hit by para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., disentitling the assessee to small scale industry exemption.

Analysis: The brand mark used on the goods created a clear connection in the mind of a purchaser between the goods and M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. The absence of the word "MARUTI" in Devanagari script did not destroy that connection. The settled principle applied was that para 7 is attracted where the brand name indicates such a connection with another person who is not eligible for the exemption.

Conclusion: The goods were hit by para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. and the assessee was not entitled to SSI exemption on those clearances.

Final Conclusion: The order dropping the duty demand was set aside and the Revenue succeeded in appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of the SSI exemption bar, a brand name attracts the exclusion if it indicates a connection between the goods and another person, even if the mark is not reproduced in every linguistic form used by that other person.

---