1. Appealed has, come up for final hearing today, the issue revolves around the eligibility of S.S.I. exemption under Notification 175/86 & 1/93 on products which are being manufactured and cleared with the brand name "RONAN NAMTECH" which is a combination of the names of the foreign collaborator & of the present appellant. Appellants have taken the plea, that the alleged brand name which is being affixed on the products, was not `foreign-brand' name and therefore is not covered by the exclusion clauses of the said notification. There is no finding to this aspect of the fact whether the said name affixed on the products is a `foreign brand name' or owned by `a foreign company' or it is `a hybrid Indian brand name' owned by and company associated with the present appellant. This matter of fact requires i.e. determination.
Therefore after hearing the matter for some time, we are of the opinion that this vital fact, whether the goods affixed with the alleged brand name are eligible for the benefit of the notification or not? is to be determined and for this purpose we would set aside the order and remand the matter to the original authority for determining as to how the said name is a brand name which is not eligible for the benefit ofthe notifications.
2. While remanding the matter back, we have considered the submissions of the learned D.R. Shri George that issue has been considered by the authorities below, but we find that no clear cut finding has been arrived at, therefore we direct that the matter should be redetermined and for that purpose the appellant should be put to proper notice and shall be free to submit such material evidence as they would opt, to establish that the brand name "RONAN NAMTECH" is not hit by the exclusion clause.
3. In view of our finding, the order is set aside and appeal allowed as remand for denovo adjudication.