Brand ownership and SSI exemption: prima facie use of the "Tiger" mark did not bar relief, securing stay of recovery.

Prima facie entitlement to Small Scale Industries exemption depended on whether the "Tiger" brand was owned by persons connected with the appellant concern. On the material produced, the brand was shown as registered in their favour, and the appellant's continued use of it was supported by that ownership. The bar against clearances under another's brand name in Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. and Para 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was therefore not attracted on a prima facie view, and waiver of pre-deposit, together with stay of recovery of duty and penalty, was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were prima facie entitled to the benefit of the Small Scale Industries exemption notifications despite the allegation that they cleared goods under a brand name belonging to others, and whether pre-deposit and recovery of the duty and penalty should be waived.

Analysis: The dispute turned on ownership of the "Tiger" brand. On the material produced, the brand was shown to have been registered in favour of the persons connected with the appellant concern, and the record indicated that the appellant continued to use that brand on the strength of such ownership. On this prima facie view, the clearances did not attract the bar contained in Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. or Para 4 of Notification No. 1/93-C.E.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty and penalty amounts.

---