Small scale exemption and registered brand ownership: own trademark use in India does not trigger the brand-name bar.

Small scale exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE cannot be denied merely because goods bear a mark associated with a foreign company where the trade mark is registered in India in the manufacturer's own name and the registration relates back to the application date. The decisive point is whether the manufacturer is using the brand name of another person for the exemption bar; use of its own registered brand name in India falls outside that restriction. On that basis, the Revenue precedent concerning use of an unowned brand name was distinguishable, and the exemption remained available.

---

---

Issues: Whether exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE could be denied on the ground that the goods bore the brand name TEGU of a foreign company, when the mark stood registered in India in the appellant's name and the registration related back to the date of application.

Analysis: The decisive question was whether the appellant was using the brand name of another person for the purpose of the small scale exemption. The registered trade mark in India stood in the appellant's name, and the registration was treated as relating back to the application date. On that basis, the appellant was the registered owner of the mark in India and the case law relied upon by the Revenue, which dealt with use of a brand name not owned by the assessee, was distinguishable. The reasoning applied to the exemption notification was that its bar does not operate where the manufacturer uses its own registered brand name in India.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of the exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE, and the demand, penalties, and confiscation based on denial of that benefit could not be sustained.

---