Trade name use on excisable goods denied small-scale exemption where the mark created commercial association with another concern.

Affixation of the mark "Swift" on excisable goods, together with sale through M/s. Swift Sales and Service, was treated as use of a trade name in the course of trade. The surrounding commercial association between the mark and that concern brought the goods within the exclusion in paragraph 7 of Notification No. 175/86-CE. The later abandonment of the mark did not change the character of its earlier use. The exemption was therefore unavailable, and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether affixation of the mark "Swift" on the excisable goods, coupled with their sale through M/s. Swift Sales and Service, amounted to use of a trade name so as to deny the benefit of the exemption under Notification No. 175/86-CE.

Analysis: The goods were described with the mark "Swift" in the classification entries for the relevant period, and the surrounding facts showed a continuing commercial association between that mark and M/s. Swift Sales and Service. The later abandonment of the mark did not alter the character of its earlier use. On these facts, the mark was treated as a trade name used in the course of trade, bringing the case within the exclusion in paragraph 7 of the exemption notification.

Conclusion: The goods were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-CE. The appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The order denying the exemption was sustained, and the appeal stood rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where excisable goods bear a mark that creates commercial association with another concern in the course of trade, the mark constitutes a trade name and the exemption exclusion for branded goods applies.

---