1992 (3) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. - Brief facts of the case are as follows :- It was alleged by the Department that the appellants herein got their excisable goods, namely Typewriter Ribbons manufactured from one M/s. Lakhotia Ribbon and Carbon Industries Private Limited without obtaining a Central Excise licence. It was also alleged that goods worth Rs. 72,500 / .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ative of the appellants herein has stated that they cannot be treated as manufacturers of the goods. They have not supplied any raw material to the actual manufacturer M/s. Lakhotia. They merely supplied the packing material to them and they also lent the brand name of theirs. He has also relied on a judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of M/s. Rainbow Ribbons, dated 22-7-1981 (referred to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned JDR reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 3. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced on both sides. It is well settled position in law now by a series of judgments of the Supreme Court that the brand name owner is not the manufacturer of the goods, that these are manufactured by another person. Accordingly, we allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X