Small scale industry exemption upheld where branding differed and the manufactured goods were not the same.

Small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86 was available because the logos and printing used by the two concerns were visually different, and the goods manufactured were also different, carbon tracks being components of potentiometers. On those facts, the department's allegation that the assessee used another manufacturer's brand name or trade name was not established, so denial of the exemption was not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86 when the department alleged use of another manufacturer's brand name or trade name, and whether the goods manufactured were different from those of the other concern.

Analysis: The logos and printing used by the two concerns were found to be visually different. The goods manufactured were also different, carbon tracks being components of potentiometers. On these facts, the basis for denying the exemption was not made out.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the exemption and the denial of benefit was not sustainable.

---