9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30/2011-CE dated 24.03.2011? HELD THAT:- The dispute involved in all the present appeals stands decided by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/S. RDB TEXTILES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, KOLKATA-IV COMMISSIONERATE [ 2018 (2) TMI 825 - SUPREME COURT] . The Hon ble Apex Court had examined the wordings of the Notification as it stood during the disputed period and decided that the printing of the name, logo and other particulars of buyer, like FCI and State Governments, were made by the manufacturers to comply with the requirements of Jute Control Order. The Hon ble Supreme Court further held that the markings on jute bags were under compulsion of law and meant for identification, monitoring and control b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re manufacturers of jute bags classifiable under chapter 63 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants were claiming the benefit of Central Excise Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004. This Notification granted exemption to jute bags. The period of dispute in the present appeal is from January 2013 to February 2013. The Notification was amended vide Notification No.12/2011-CE dated 01.03.2011. The manufacturers of the jute bags were required to print certain information in terms of order passed by the Jute Commissioner. These details included the name of the buyers, logo, year of manufacture etc. Bulk of these jute bags manufactured were supplied to Food Corporation of India as well as various State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act affixed to the jute bags is the name of the procurer agency in question such as the FCI, the State Government of Punjab and so on, the crop year, the name of the jute mill concerned, its BIS certification number and the statement that the food grains are manufactured in India. It is clear that all the aforesaid markings have, on the pain of penalty, to be done by the manufacturers of the jute bags, given the Jute Control Order and the requisition orders made thereunder. Obviously, such markings are made by compulsion of law, which are meant for identification, monitoring and control by Governmental agencies involved in the PDS. Neither do such markings enhance the value of the jute bags in any manner nor is it the intention of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or Elastics (supra), it was found that, as a matter of fact, the customer wanted the brand name affixed on the product because he wanted the consumer to know that there is a connection between the product and him. This is very far from the facts of the present case, in that, as has been held by us above, it is clear that the markings required on the jute bags are compulsory, being required by the Jute Commissioner, and are not for the purpose of enhancing the value of the jute bags by indicating a connection in the course of trade between the aforesaid products and the manufacturer of those products." 9. Since the issue has already been decided by the Apex Court, by respectfully following the ratio of the Apex Court, we allow the appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
