9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee is arising before the Tribunal in a second round. In the first round, this Bench had remanded the matter vide order No.A/6/CSTB/2008/C-I dated 2.1.2008 in appeal No. C/1043/07 to the adjudicating authority with a direction to it to consider the assessee's new plea that they were to be treated as manufacturers of the goods in question by virtue of the Standards of Weights and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or manufactures such commodity and includes a person, firm or Hindu undivided family who or which puts, or causes to be put, any mark on any packaged commodity, not produced, made or manufactured by him or it, and the mark claims the commodity in the package to be commodity produced, made or manufactured by such person, firm or Hindu undivided family, as the case may be;" The adjudicating authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rule 2A. Therefore, according to the appellant, they are not required to affix MRP on their product and hence its valuation for purposes of CVD should be done under Section 4 and not under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. 4. We have heard the learned SDR who has referred to the definition of 'manufacturer' given under Rule 2(h) ibid and has submitted that, in the absence of any marking on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that of the brand owner, it would suffice. In this case, the goods do bear the trade mark of Appellants and it is sold and marketed by them as their product. Hence this objection is not sustainable." It is submitted by the learned SDR that the above interpretation given by the assessee is not correct. 5. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we find that the appellant has give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in question should be held to have been manufactured by the assessee, it should bear clear markings indicating that it was made, produced or manufactured by them. It is not in dispute that the packaged commodity imported by the appellant did not bear any such marking. There is nothing in the definition of 'manufacturer' to show that mere affixture of trade mark would suffice the requirement of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
