SSI exemption remains available when the brand name is registered in the assessee's own name and is legally distinct.

SSI exemption could not be denied where the assessee used a brand name registered in its own name and the mark was distinct from another concern's registered trade mark. The Tribunal noted that the statutory certificate showed ownership of the relevant mark for the goods cleared, and the Revenue's objection rested only on alleged similarity, which was not borne out by the record. The precedent on a brand name registered in more than one person's name was held inapplicable on these facts. The assessee was therefore eligible for the exemption, and the demand founded on its denial could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to Small Scale Industry exemption when the brand name used on its products was registered in its own name and was distinct from the trade mark registered in the name of another concern.

Analysis: The goods were manufactured and cleared under the appellant's registered trade mark, effective from the date of application, and the certificate issued by the statutory authority showed that the mark belonged to the appellant for the relevant goods. The Revenue's objection rested only on an alleged similarity with another trade mark, but the records showed that the two marks were visually and legally distinct. The reliance on the precedent concerning a brand name registered in more than one person's name was held inapplicable because, on the facts here, the appellant's mark stood registered in its own name.

Conclusion: The appellant was eligible for the SSI exemption and the demand based on denial of that benefit could not stand.

Ratio Decidendi: SSI exemption cannot be denied where the brand name used by the assessee is registered in its own name and is distinct from any other registered trade mark.

---