Brand name exemption depends on ownership of the mark; marketing and invoicing alone did not defeat the exemption here.

Exemption from duty is denied only where the manufacturer affixes the brand name or trade name of another person who is not eligible for the exemption. The mere fact that a different concern marketed the trailers and issued invoices in the disputed name did not by itself establish transfer or ownership of that brand name. On the facts stated, the name remained with the manufacturing firm entitled to exemption, so the statutory condition for denial was not met and the duty demand and penalties were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trailers marked with "Super Trailers" bore a brand name belonging to a person ineligible for exemption, so as to deny the exemption and sustain the duty demand and penalty.

Analysis: The relevant exemption provisions deny relief only where the manufacturer affixes the brand name or trade name of a person who is not eligible for the exemption. The mere circumstance that one concern marketed the goods and issued invoices in the disputed name did not establish transfer or ownership of the brand name. On the facts, the name continued to belong to the manufacturing firm entitled to the exemption, and the condition for denying the benefit was therefore not satisfied.

Conclusion: The exemption could not be denied, and the duty demand and penalties were unsustainable.

---