https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41393 In a franchise and trade mark-controlled bottling arrangement, the entity that purchased the composition and ingredients and carried out the manufacturing, bottling, distribution and marketing on its own account was treated as the manufacturer for excise purposes. Mere retention of trade mark rights and quality controls by the supplier did not shift the character of manufacturer to that supplier under the statutory definition in Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On that basis, the petitioner was held entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 211/77-Central Excise, and the excise order withdrawing the exemption was set aside. en-us Fri, 25 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Jun 2010 16:59:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41393 In a franchise and trade mark-controlled bottling arrangement, the entity that purchased the composition and ingredients and carried out the manufacturing, bottling, distribution and marketing on its own account was treated as the manufacturer for excise purposes. Mere retention of trade mark rights and quality controls by the supplier did not shift the character of manufacturer to that supplier under the statutory definition in Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On that basis, the petitioner was held entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 211/77-Central Excise, and the excise order withdrawing the exemption was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41393