Printed cartons and excise exemption fail where printing does not change the goods' essential identity as packaging material.

Printed cartons did not qualify as products of the printing industry for exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. because, in common parlance and trade, their essential identity remained that of cartons and packaging material. The printing process did not create the goods, but only appeared on articles that continued to be cartons. The later authority on printed aluminium labels did not disturb this position. Accordingly, printed cartons were not entitled to excise exemption as printing-industry products.

---

---

Issues: Whether printed cartons manufactured by the respondent were products of the printing industry and therefore exempt from excise duty under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. dated 1 March 1975, as amended.

Analysis: The exemption covered products of the printing industry other than newspapers and periodicals. Printed cartons, even though they involve printing, remain cartons in common parlance and in trade. The printing does not bring the carton into existence; the essential character of the goods is that of packaging material. The later decision concerning printed aluminium labels did not alter the settled position that a carton does not cease to be a carton merely because it is printed.

Conclusion: Printed cartons are not products of the printing industry and are not entitled to exemption under the notification.

Ratio Decidendi: For exemption limited to products of the printing industry, the goods must be classifiable in common parlance as products whose essential identity is printing, not as cartons or packaging articles merely bearing printing.

---