Medicament classification turns on labels and generic names, while a house mark alone does not decide the tariff heading.

Classification of medicaments depends on the actual product description, labels and nomenclature, not on the mere use of a house mark or logo on containers. A logo by itself was held insufficient to treat the goods as branded medicaments under the relevant tariff note. The classification of the disputed products, other than Gentamicin Injection, was remanded for fresh consideration because the earlier treatment of similar products was inconsistent and the labels required re-examination to determine whether the names were established generic names or merely descriptive or invented expressions. Gentamicin Injection was separately sustained as a generic medicament under Heading 3003.20.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the mere use of the loan licensee's house mark or logo on medicament containers and labels justified classification under Heading 3003.10, and (ii) whether the disputed products were classifiable as generic medicaments under Heading 3003.20 or required reconsideration on the basis of their labels and nomenclature.

Issue (i): Whether the mere use of the loan licensee's house mark or logo on medicament containers and labels justified classification under Heading 3003.10.

Analysis: The presence of a house mark or logo by itself was held insufficient to attract classification as branded medicaments under the relevant chapter note. The classification depended on the actual nature of the product and the effect of the label/marking, and not on logo usage alone.

Conclusion: The contention that the house mark/logo alone compelled a different classification was not accepted.

Issue (ii): Whether the disputed products were classifiable as generic medicaments under Heading 3003.20 or required reconsideration on the basis of their labels and nomenclature.

Analysis: The order below was found inconsistent because some products were treated as not falling within generic medicaments, while similar products were not given the same treatment. The classification turned on whether the names used were established generic names or merely invented/descriptive expressions, and the labels and containers required re-examination before a final determination could be made. Gentamicin Injection was separately upheld under Heading 3003.20.

Conclusion: The classification of the disputed products, except Gentamicin Injection, was remanded for fresh consideration, while the classification of Gentamicin Injection under Heading 3003.20 was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The order resulted in a partial relief to the assessee, with the main classification dispute partly rejected and partly sent back for reconsideration, while one item was sustained as classifiable as generic medicament.

Ratio Decidendi: Classification of medicaments must be determined from the actual product description and labels, and the mere presence of a house mark or logo does not by itself decide the tariff heading.

---