https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91752 Paragraph 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was held not to be attracted merely because flex cords cleared for use in Mixies and TVs carried the customers' brand names, since those marks belonged to the finished appliances and not to the cords as independent trade goods. The exemption therefore was not denied on that basis. Liability could, however, arise if verification showed that the cords were separately sold as spare parts in the replacement market, because such sale of the goods as such would bring the paragraph 7 bar into operation. en-us Wed, 17 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:47:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91752 Paragraph 7 of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was held not to be attracted merely because flex cords cleared for use in Mixies and TVs carried the customers' brand names, since those marks belonged to the finished appliances and not to the cords as independent trade goods. The exemption therefore was not denied on that basis. Liability could, however, arise if verification showed that the cords were separately sold as spare parts in the replacement market, because such sale of the goods as such would bring the paragraph 7 bar into operation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91752