House mark versus brand name distinction preserved small scale industry exemption for medicines marked 'BC'.

The mark 'BC' on the medicines was treated as a house mark rather than a brand name because it served only to indicate the manufacturer and did not identify the goods as bought or sold under that mark. On that basis, the conditions for denying small scale industry exemption were not met, and the assessee remained entitled to exemption under Notification No. 175/86.

---

---

Issues: Whether the mark 'BC' used on the medicines was a house mark and not a brand name, so as to preserve entitlement to small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86 dated 01.03.1986.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had distinguished between a brand name and a house mark and had found that the symbol 'BC' appearing on the goods did not identify the medicines by which they were bought or sold. The reasoning accepted that the mark served only to indicate the manufacturer and did not establish the kind of product identification required to treat it as a brand name for denying exemption. The Revenue's ground did not effectively assail this central finding.

Conclusion: The mark 'BC' was held to be only a house mark, and the assessee remained entitled to the small scale industry exemption.

---