Brand name bar on SSI exemption, with cum-duty assessment and MODVAT credit allowed subject to verification

Small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was unavailable where the goods bore the mark "A TTK Product", because that mark indicated a trade connection with another person whose brand name was not eligible for the exemption. The demand was therefore sustained on the exemption issue. However, despite upholding the duty demand, consequential relief was granted by allowing assessment on a cum-duty basis and permitting MODVAT credit, subject to verification of the duty-paid nature of the inputs used in manufacture. The article states the ratio that SSI exemption fails when specified goods carry another person's brand name or trade name that denotes a commercial connection with that person.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the appellants were entitled to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. when their goods bore the mark "A TTK Product"; (ii) whether, on upholding the demand, the appellants were entitled to cum-duty benefit and MODVAT credit.

Issue (i): whether the appellants were entitled to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. when their goods bore the mark "A TTK Product".

Analysis: The exemption under the notification did not apply where specified goods were affixed with the brand name or trade name of another person not eligible for the benefit. The expression "brand name" included a mark used to indicate a connection in the course of trade between the goods and the person using the mark. Since "A TTK Product" indicated such a connection with the TTK Group and the brand name owner was not eligible for SSI exemption, the benefit of the notification was unavailable.

Conclusion: The appellants were not entitled to SSI exemption, and the demand was upheld.

Issue (ii): whether, on upholding the demand, the appellants were entitled to cum-duty benefit and MODVAT credit.

Analysis: While sustaining the duty demand, the order extended consequential relief by allowing assessment on cum-duty basis and permitting MODVAT credit subject to verification of the duty-paid nature of the inputs used in manufacture.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to cum-duty benefit and to MODVAT credit on verification.

Final Conclusion: The exemption claim failed, but the duty demand stood partly moderated by the grant of cum-duty and input credit reliefs.

Ratio Decidendi: SSI exemption is not available where the specified goods bear another person's brand name or trade name that indicates a connection in the course of trade with that person and such person is not eligible for the exemption.

---