SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(Ker) 112

M.U.ISAAC
MADAN BEEDI DEPOT – Appellant
Versus
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALICUT – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The petitioner is a partnership firm dealing in beedies. According to the petitioner, it does not manufacture beedies. It buys beedies from several persons, who under contracts entered with petitioner make and supply beedies to the petitioner; and the petitioner sells them to his customers. The business is a fairly large one. The petitioner buys and stocks beedi tobacco and leaves in sufficient quantities for getting beedies manufactured for its business. It has adopted two methods for this purpose. There are a number of persons who have taken out licenses under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for manufacture of beedies. Beedi tobacco and leaves are got by such persons, who are hereinafter referred to as the licensees, from the petitioner. The licensees distribute the tobacco and leaves to different persons, who take the goods to their respective homes and make beedies according to specification. The beedies are then supplied to the licensees, who pay for the same at a fixed rate. The licensees supply the beedies to the petitioner at the agreed rate. This is the first method. The second method to that the petitioner supplies beedi tobacco and leaves to different persons








































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top