Small scale exemption and brand name use: denial requires proof that the mark actually identified another person's goods in trade.

Small scale exemption under Notification Nos. 1/93-C.E. and 8/99-C.E. is denied only when the goods bear another person's brand name or trade name, meaning a mark used to indicate a trade connection with that person's goods. Mere use of a logo or name by another unit is not enough. The decisive requirement is proof that the mark had acquired the character of that other person's brand name or trade name, usually through goodwill or trade association. On the material noted, no such proof was shown, and the Board circular supported the view that use of a brand name not owned by any particular person does not by itself forfeit exemption. The SSI denial and consequent duty demand were therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was disentitled to small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. and Notification No. 8/99-C.E. on the ground that its goods bore the brand name or trade name of another person.

Analysis: The exemption under the notifications was denied only if the specified goods bore a brand name or trade name of another person, as defined in the notifications, namely a name or mark used in relation to the goods for indicating a connection in the course of trade between the goods and some person using that name or mark. Mere use of a logo or name by another unit was not enough. The decisive requirement was proof that the mark had acquired the status of a brand name or trade name in relation to the goods of that other person, generally through establishment of goodwill or trade connection. The record did not show any material or finding that the mark in question had acquired such status in favour of the other unit. The Board circular also supported the position that use of a brand name not owned by any particular person does not deprive a unit of exemption.

Conclusion: The denial of SSI benefit on the footing of violation of the brand name or trade name condition was unsustainable, and the duty demand could not stand.

Ratio Decidendi: For denial of small scale exemption on the ground of use of another person's brand name or trade name, it must be affirmatively shown that the mark used had acquired the character of a brand name or trade name of that person by indicating a trade connection with the goods; mere user of a common or unproved logo is insufficient.

---