Brand name test for exemption turns on whether the label uses the registered mark, not merely the manufacturer's name.

For exemption notifications that deny benefit to goods bearing a brand name, the controlling test is whether the mark used on the goods is in fact the manufacturer's brand name or trade mark. Here, the registered brand mark consisted of the letters S, V and S in boxed form, while the label merely carried "S.V.S. & SONS" as the manufacturer's name. That wording did not amount to use of the registered brand mark, so it was not a brand name for the purpose of denying exemption on refined edible oils cleared in unit containers. The exemption therefore remained available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the words printed on the product label constituted a brand name so as to deny exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. for refined edible oils cleared in unit containers.

Analysis: The respondents had been using a registered combination of the letters S, V and S, each enclosed in a rectangular box, as their brand name or trade mark. The label on the goods, however, carried the superscription "S.V.S. & SONS", which merely denoted the name of the manufacturer and was different from the registered brand mark. On that basis, the markings on the label did not answer the description of a brand name for the purpose of the exemption notification.

Conclusion: The label inscription did not constitute a brand name, and the exemption under the notification remained available; the Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: Exemption could not be denied merely because the manufacturer's name appeared on the label when the goods were not cleared under the registered brand mark.

Ratio Decidendi: For exemption notifications denying benefit to goods bearing a brand name, the relevant test is whether the mark used on the goods is in fact the brand name or trade mark of the manufacturer, and a mere display of the manufacturer's name does not amount to use of a brand name.

---