Brand name evidence required before denying small-scale exemption for electrical light fittings marked with letters alone.

Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. and, as applicable, Notification No. 1/93-C.E. could not be denied to electrical light fittings merely because they bore the letters "F", "FLB" or "FAD". The decisive point was that the markings, by themselves, did not establish that they were the brand name of another manufacturer. In the absence of proof that the marks belonged to an ineligible person, the denial of exemption was unsustainable, and the assessee remained entitled to the notification benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. or Notification No. 1/93-C.E., as applicable, could be denied to the electrical light fittings cleared by the assessee merely because they bore the letters "F", "FLB" or "FAD".

Analysis: The denial of exemption was found unsustainable because the letters on the goods did not, by themselves, establish that they represented the brand name of another manufacturer. The appellate authority's finding was self-contained and supported by the record, and no proof had been produced to show that the marks were in fact the brand name of an ineligible person. The grounds raised in the appeal did not undermine that reasoning.

Conclusion: The exemption could not be denied on the stated ground, and the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the notifications.

---