Family surname use and SSI exemption: "Mankoo" was treated as a family name, not another's brand.

Use of the family surname "Mankoo" on goods did not, on these facts, amount to use of another person's brand name for denying small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 08/2003-CE. The notification treats a brand name or trade name as a name or mark indicating a trade connection, whether registered or unregistered, but the surname had been used by multiple family business entities for years without objection from the alleged registered owner. It was therefore treated as a family name rather than appropriation of an external brand, and the departmental authorities cited were distinguished on facts. The SSI exemption was held available.

---

---

Issues: Whether use of the family surname "Mankoo" on the goods disentitled the appellants to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 08/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 on the ground that the brand name was not their own.

Analysis: The notification defines "brand name" or "trade name" to include a name or mark used to indicate a connection in the course of trade, whether registered or unregistered. On the facts, "Mankoo" was a family surname used across the family business entities for years, with no complaint from the alleged registered owner against the other family concerns. The use was treated as use of a family name rather than appropriation of another person's brand, and the cited departmental authorities were distinguished on facts.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to the SSI exemption and denial of the benefit on the ground of use of the surname "Mankoo" was not sustainable.

---