SSI exemption and brand name licence dispute: limited non-exclusive use was insufficient for full waiver of pre-deposit.

Use of another person's brand name defeated the claim to SSI exemption because the agreement showed the trademark remained the sole and exclusive property of the foreign licensor, while the appellant received only a limited, non-exclusive and non-transferable licence in India. On that basis, the Tribunal found no strong prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in respect of the duty demand. It nevertheless adopted a lenient interim approach and granted only partial relief by directing a pre-deposit, rather than full waiver.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit in respect of the duty demand arising from denial of SSI exemption on the ground of use of another person's brand name.

Analysis: The agreement produced before the Tribunal showed that the trademark remained the sole and exclusive property of the foreign licensor and that the appellant was granted only a limited, non-exclusive and non-transferable licence to use the mark in India. On that basis, the claim that the appellant had an exclusive right to use the brand name in India was not accepted. The material relied upon by the appellant was therefore held not to establish a strong prima facie case for complete waiver. At the same time, the Tribunal took a lenient view while balancing the request for interim relief.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to full waiver of pre-deposit and was directed to deposit Rs. 4.5 lakhs within the stipulated time.

---