9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Puja Banga, Brief Holder for the respondent. JUDGMENT The above revision applications raised similar question of law and, accordingly, are decided by this common judgment. 2. The revisionist sold "Jeeva soap" manufactured by it. The word "Jeeva" appears to be the brand name of the revisionist. While, therefore, selling "Jeeva soap", it represented to its intending buyers that it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pay 12 per cent. tax. The contention of the revisionist before the appellate authority was that "Jeeva soap" is not a soap, but is an ayurvedic medicine. Though, such a contention was put forward, but it was never represented before the appellate authority or before the Tribunal that the revisionist, while selling "Jeeva soap", made a representation that it is an ayurvedic medicine and not a soap. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmaceutical preparation is being sold, but as aforesaid, even before us, there is no assertion that the revisionist held out to its prospective buyers that it is selling only a pharmaceutical preparation. On the other hand, by branding its branded product "Jeeva" as a soap, it held out to its prospective buyers that the revisionist is selling nothing but a soap and there being no contention that " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
