Secondary packing brand marking does not defeat small scale exemption when the goods and primary packing bear the assessee's own brand.

Small scale exemption cannot be denied merely because the expression "As seen on TSN/VTS" appears only on secondary packing used for transport, where the goods and primary packing carry the assessee's own brand. Marking on outer cartons does not amount to the goods bearing another person's brand name or trade name. On the limitation issue, the record did not show deliberate evasion, and the demand and consequential penalties could not be sustained. The exemption was upheld and the duty demand and penalties were set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the presence of the expression "As seen on TSN/VTS" only on the outer cartons, and not on the goods or primary packing, disentitled the assessee to small scale exemption; (ii) whether the demand and penalties could be sustained in view of limitation.

Issue (i): Whether the presence of the expression "As seen on TSN/VTS" only on the outer cartons, and not on the goods or primary packing, disentitled the assessee to small scale exemption.

Analysis: The exemption under the relevant notification was denied only if the goods bore a brand name or trade name of another person. The mark in question was found only on secondary packing, i.e. the outer cartons used for transportation, while the goods and primary packing carried the assessee's own brand. The mark on secondary packing did not establish use of another's brand name on the goods themselves, and the earlier authority on similar facts supported exemption where a marking on outer packaging did not amount to use of another person's trade mark or brand name.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee and the exemption could not be denied on this ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the demand and penalties could be sustained in view of limitation.

Analysis: The record did not establish any deliberate attempt to evade duty, and the plea of limitation was supported by the surrounding facts and the earlier understanding of the legal position. In the absence of sustainable merits for the demand and in view of the limitation objection, the consequential penalties also could not survive.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee and the demand and penalties were not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The exemption was upheld, the duty demand and penalties were set aside, and the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A mark appearing only on secondary packing used for transport, and not on the goods or primary packing, does not constitute the goods bearing another person's brand name or trade name for denying small scale exemption.

---