Brand name ownership controls small-scale exemption; using the same mark on different goods does not trigger the notification bar.

Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86 denies small-scale exemption only when the specified goods bear the brand name or trade name of another person who is not eligible for the exemption. The decisive factor is ownership of the brand name for the goods in dispute. On the facts discussed, the assessee had acquired ownership of the mark by assignment, and the earlier use of the same mark by another person on different products did not attract the bar in Para 7. Authorities distinguishing contrary decisions were noted on the basis that those assessees did not own the relevant brand name for the goods under consideration, so the exemption remained available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 despite use of the brand name on their goods, and whether Para 7 of the Notification barred the exemption.

Analysis: Para 7 denies exemption only where the specified goods bear the brand name or trade name of another person who is not eligible for the exemption. The ownership of the brand name is material. The trade mark law recognised that a mark may be registered in respect of specific goods, and the respondents had established ownership of the brand name used on the goods in question through assignment. The fact that the former holder used the same mark for different products did not, on these facts, attract the bar in Para 7. The cited contrary decisions were distinguished on the ground that in those cases the assessees did not own the relevant brand name for the goods under dispute.

Conclusion: The respondents were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86, and the appeal by the Revenue was rejected.

Final Conclusion: Eligibility for the small-scale exemption was upheld because the brand name used on the disputed goods belonged to the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee owns the brand name used on the specified goods, Para 7 of Notification No. 175/86 is not attracted merely because the same mark is used by another person for different goods.

---