2002 (2) TMI 166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....trepreneur engineer having no factory, no power connection, no machinery, no labour and staff, received purchase orders from M/s. Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd., and M/s. M.T.N.L. for supply of D.P. Boxes/casing with mounting plates; that they entered into an agreement with M/s. Salwan Plastomers for manufacture of D.P. Boxes out of the raw materials supplied by them; that for the purpose of quality control dies were supplied by the Appellants with a condition to test and inspect the goods in the factory of the job worker who was registered with the Central Excise Department as a licensee for the manufacture of the excisable goods; that on account of dispute with the job worker, complaints were made by Shri Kamal Sharma, proprieto....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wan Plastomers which is mentioned in the show cause notice also. He relied upon the decision in the case of O.R.G. Systems v. CCE, Vadodara, 1998 (102) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), wherein it was held that the supply of raw materials alone does not make the supplier as manufacturer. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case of Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-II, 2001 (134) E.L.T. 137 (T) and Bhilwara Spinners Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur, [2000 (118) E.L.T. 591 (T) = 2000 (37) RLT 734 (CEGAT)] wherein it was held that assembly of duty paid parts of card cans into card cans does not amount to manufacture. Finally the learned Advocate referred to the decision in the case of CCE, Baroda v. M.M. Khambhatwala, 1996 (84) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.). ....