2019 (9) TMI 1552

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2004-CE dated 09.07.2004. The Notification granted exemption to jute bags. The period of dispute is from 01.03.2011 to 28.02.2013, during which the Notification was amended vide Notification No.12/2011-CE dated 01.03.2011. The amendment restricted the exemption to goods other than those bearing brand name or sold under the brand name. 2. The jute bags manufactured by the appellants, were required to print on jute bags certain information in terms of orders passed by the Jute Commissioner. These details included the name of the buyers, logo, year of manufacture etc.. Bulk of the jute bags manufactured were supplied to Food Corporation of India as well as various State Government Agency to be used in the Public Distribution System. After n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....markings cannot be considered as brand name. Accordingly, the Apex Court held that the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE will be available during the disputed period. The observations of the Apex Court are reproduced below : "18. It is obvious that, on the facts of these cases, what is in fact 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 req....