Case Law Details
Central Excise – SSI Exemption – Use of another person’s brand name – Not entitled for exemption: It is manifest from a bare reading of Clause 4 of the Notification, read with Explanation IX that it clearly debars an assessee from the benefit of exemption under the notification, if he uses another person’s brand or trade name with the intention of indicating a connection between the assessee’s goods and such other person. It is evident that the object of the exemption notification is to grant benefits only to those industries which otherwise do not have the advantage of brand or trade name.
In order to avail of the benefit of the exemption notification, the assessee must establish that his product is not associated with some other person: if it is shown that the assessee has affixed the brand name of another person on his goods with the intention of indicating a connection between the assessee’s goods and the goods of another person, using such name or mark, then the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of exemption notification; if the assessee is able to satisfy the Adjudicating Authority that there was no such intention, or that the user of the brand name was entirely fortuitous, it would be entitled to the benefit of the exemption
Commissioner Central Excise, Delhi Vs.
M/s. Ace Auto Comp. Ltd. (Supreme Court)
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
JPG images of amendments are less usefull please make available in PDF with better formats.