Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1987 (5) TMI 285

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the first named firm. The appeal says that the Appellate Collector should have held that M/s. Aurofood Private Limited were manufacturers of the metal containers in view of the definition of manufacturer as given in Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and that the duty was payable by them. The appellants says that the sheets were supplied by M/s. Aurofood and the same were converted (I supposed the means made) into metal containers by M/s. Indian Metal Industries, for which job Indian Metal was paid 50 np. a can. The containers were embossed with M/s. Aurofood s biscuit brand name TRUE . It therefore, appeared, continues the appellant, that the metal containers were manufactured on account of M/s. Aurofood and hence .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... use they are not. 4. The department has not understood the definition given by Section 2(f) of the Act. If a process is incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured prod-cut, it does not make M/s. Aurofood the manufacturers of the tin cans. This section only means that if anything further is done after the goods have been manufactured, and such process is necessary for the completion of the product, such processes shall be included in the processes of completing a manufactured product as processes incidental or ancillary to its manufacture. Thus, if a tin can, after completion, is painted, polished, or stamped with a name etc., such painting, polishing, stamping will be incidental or ancillary processes to the finishing of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rice by M/s. Aurofood. M/s. Aurofood did not engage in the production of tin containers any more than a man who places an order for a pair of shoes to be made by a professional shoe-maker engage himself in shoe-making even if he should supply the leather and other wherewithals; or a man who places an order for a coat, out of material he delivers engage himself in the work of tailoring. One can see no sensible reason for saying that M/s. Aurofood engaged themselves in the manufacture of tin cans when we know for a fact that the tin cans were manufactured by M/s. Indian Metal Industries in a commercial transaction, for compensation and full payment. There is no law for deeming a man to be a manufacturer, unless he is really a manufacturer. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates