SSI exemption and brand name assignment: assignee treated as owner despite unregistered deed, defeating the demand.

SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE remained available where the disputed brand name had been assigned to the assessee during the relevant period. The assigned brand name was treated as belonging to the assignee for exemption purposes, and registration of the deed of assignment was not required to establish that ownership. Relying on earlier decisions, the Tribunal accepted that the exemption consequence followed the assignment itself. The demand and penalties were therefore not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to the benefit of SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE despite the goods bearing the brand name that had been assigned to them during the relevant period.

Analysis: The brand name was found to have been assigned to the appellants by a deed of assignment during the period of dispute. On assignment, the assignee is to be treated as the owner of the brand name even if the assignment deed is not registered. The reasoning was supported by earlier decisions recognising that ownership for exemption purposes follows the assignment during the relevant period. The plea that the demand was time-barred was not examined.

Conclusion: The benefit of SSI exemption was admissible to the appellants and the demand and penalties could not be sustained.

---