SSI exemption and brand name ownership: prior factual finding upheld, defeating denial of exemption and related duty penalties.

Small scale industry exemption could not be denied where the Tribunal accepted a prior factual finding that the brand name was no longer owned by a third party. It held that a relevant quasi-judicial finding may be relied on in the absence of contrary evidence, and rejected the Revenue's objection that the finding could not be considered merely because an appeal may have been filed. On that basis, the objection that the appellants were using another person's brand name failed, and the exemption claim, duty demand, penalties, and adverse findings were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to small scale industry exemption when the brand name used by them was found to have been owned by a third party, and whether the consequent duty and penalties could be sustained.

Analysis: The appellants produced the 1980 partnership deed to show prior use of the brand name. The Tribunal relied on the finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals), Chennai that Shri C.K. Abdul Rahiman no longer owned the brand name. It held that a relevant factual finding of a quasi-judicial authority could be relied upon in the absence of contrary evidence, and rejected the Revenue's objection that such finding could not be taken into account merely because an appeal might have been filed. On that basis, the denial of SSI benefit on the premise that the appellants were using another person's brand name was found unsustainable.

Conclusion: The appellants were held entitled to the exemption claim, and the duty demand, penalties, and adverse findings were set aside.

---