Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
410 judgments · newest first · showing 201–400
The Supreme Court examined whether Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 imposes a mandatory penalty for short levy or non‑levy of duty and whether mens rea is an essential element. The Court held that the provision creates a civil liability for breach of a statutory obligation and the …
Shreeji Colour Chem Industries sought a refund of excise duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944, which was repeatedly rejected before being allowed by the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal. The assessee then applied for statutory interest on the delayed refund, and the Gujarat High …
The Revenue challenged the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal’s finding that 22 products of Ishan Research Lab were Ayurvedic medicines under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff, liable to 10% duty, rather than cosmetics under Chapter 33 at 40% duty. The Court examined whether …
The Commissioner of Customs appealed against a Tribunal order that had allowed Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd. to claim duty exemption under Notification No. 94/96-Cus for three re‑imported consignments. The assessee had originally relied on Notification No. 158/95-Cus, executing separate bonds and …
M/s Asian Peroxides Ltd., an Export Oriented Unit, claimed exemption under Notification No.8/97‑CE for hydrogen peroxide manufactured in India and cleared to the domestic market. The issue was whether the items used in the manufacturing process were "raw materials" (eligible for exemption) or merely …
Bhupendra Steel (P) Ltd, a manufacturer of steel bars, rods and ingots, claimed exemption from central excise duty under Notification No.208/83-CE as amended by Notifications 90/88-CE and 202/88-CE, asserting that its inputs were "pieces roughly shaped" as defined in tariff heading 72.08. The …
M/s Karnataka Agro Chemicals manufactured "multi micronutrient" compounds, registered as fertilizers, and the Central Excise Commissioner alleged that the company misdeclared the products as containing nitrogen to attract classification under "other fertilizers" (CHS 3105.00) and evade duty. The …
The Commissioner of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice on 18 January 1999 demanding differential excise duty and penalties from India Thermit Corporation Ltd. (ITCL) and its subsidiary Asiatic Thermics Ltd. (ATL) for alleged mis‑classification, suppression of facts and undervaluation of …
Orient Ceramics & India Ltd imported two consignments of tiles and claimed they were unglazed porcelain tiles under tariff heading 6907.90, which is freely importable without a licence. Physical examination and tests by the Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL) showed the tiles were glazed, …
M/S. Prachi Industries, a small‑scale unit, purchased duty‑paid mild steel (MS) tubes classified under heading 73.06 and processed them by cutting to length and then subjecting them to swaging on a rotary machine fitted with various dies. The Revenue argued that the swaged product remained the same …
The appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, challenged the classification of four items manufactured by the respondent—rail assembly front seat, adjuster/assembly slider seat, YE‑2 rear back lock assembly and 1000 cc rear back lock assembly. The respondent had classified them under Chapter …
The appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, challenged the assessee M/s Kraftech Products Inc.'s claim of exemption from excise duty on hair‑dye packed in three 3‑gram sachets per packet (total 9 g). The assessee argued that, under Rule 34(b) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged …
The assessee, Dugar Tetenal India Ltd., cleared photographic chemicals under the brand name “Tetenal” claiming exemption under Notification No. 175/86‑CE of the Central Excise Act. Investigation revealed that the brand belonged to a German collaborator, not the assessee, and that the assessee had …
The appellant, Geo Tech Foundations & Construction, manufactured PSC girders for a railway bridge and cleared them without paying central excise duty. A show‑cause notice demanding duty, confiscation and penalty was issued on 8 May 1996, well beyond the six‑month limitation period then applicable. …
M/s. Lohia Sheet Products imported copper/brass waste and scrap for making handicrafts and claimed exemption under Notification No.8/96‑CE (Entry 74.04) which provides a NIL rate of additional customs duty. The Customs authorities and the Tribunal rejected the claim, holding that the exemption …
The respondent, Vinayaga Body Building Industry Ltd, manufactured motor cabs on duty‑paid chassis with a seating capacity of 12 passengers plus a driver. The chassis were invoiced by the manufacturer under sub‑heading 8706.29, but the Revenue classified the completed cabs under sub‑heading 8702.10, …
Moriroku UT India (P) Ltd., a manufacturer of plastic automobile components, received tools, dies and moulds free of cost from its customer Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. to produce components. The Uttar Pradesh Tax Department levied trade tax under Section 3 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 on the …
The appeals concerned whether a High Court could condone a delay in filing a reference application under Section 35‑H of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The reference applications were filed after the statutory period of 180 days. The Court examined the provisions of Sections 35‑G, 35‑E(3) and the …
M/s Kurian Abraham Pvt. Ltd. purchased raw field latex in Kerala, processed it into centrifuged latex in Tamil Nadu and sold the product. For assessment years 1997‑98 and 1998‑99 the assessee relied on Circular No. 16/98 issued by the Kerala Board of Revenue under s.3(1A)(c) of the Kerala General …
Phil Corporation Ltd. processed cashew nuts, peanuts and almonds by dry/oil roasting, salting, seasoning and packed them in small containers, clearing the goods without paying excise duty and claiming classification under Chapter 8 (0801.00) at a nil rate. The Revenue argued that the processed …
Nirlex Spares Pvt. Ltd., a small‑scale manufacturer of steel heads, printed a hexagonal artistic design on its corrugated boxes alongside its own brand names. The tax authorities held that the design was a monogram belonging to its marketing agent, L.M.S. Marketing Co., and therefore denied the …
The Supreme Court heard two civil appeals concerning the claim of exemption from excise duty for cotton fabrics processed without the aid of power under various notifications. In both cases the appellants used electric power for ancillary operations such as mixing chemicals, lifting water and …
Miss Singh Enterprises appealed to the Supreme Court against the order of the Jharkhand High Court which had dismissed its writ petition challenging the dismissal of its appeal under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. The appeal had been filed 21 months after the service of the original order, …
Mis Supreme Fabrics Ltd claimed that loading charges incurred while clearing goods from its factory gate should be treated as cum‑duty price, allowing an abatement of excise duty payable on those charges. The Assessing Officer held the charges were includible in assessable value and denied the …
Fedders Lloyd Corporation Ltd manufactured condensing units at its Delhi plant and procured cooling units from local manufacturers. It assembled these components with pipe kits, cords, remote controls and performed quality checks at its Mumbai workshop, thereby creating a complete split …
M/s. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. manufactured chassis whose value depended on standard fitments. The price lists for November 1994 and April 1995 mistakenly recorded Engine No. 692 DI and Gear Box GBS 30 as standard, whereas the actual standard fitments were Engine No. 697 NA and Gear Box …
Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. (RSWML) set up a process house for fabric processing and later leased it to other firms. The Central Excise Department alleged that the lease was a sham intended to shift valuation from the comparable‑goods method to the cost method and demanded differential …
The assessee, Mis. Somaiya Organics (India) Ltd., operated a distillery that produced ethyl alcohol denatured (SDS) and a chemical factory that consumed the SDS for manufacturing specified chemicals. The assessee valued the transferred SDS on a costing basis under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise …
Whirlpool of India Ltd, a refrigerator manufacturer, challenged Notification No. 9 of 2000 issued under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, which required the maximum retail price (MRP) to be printed on the package of goods. The company argued that a refrigerator is not a “packaged commodity” …
The case concerned Vanasthali Textiles Industries Ltd., a 100% Export Oriented Undertaking, which claimed a partial excise duty exemption under Notification No. 8/97‑CE for products manufactured using imported carboxymethyl cellulose (a sizing material) and imported indigo dye. The central issue was …
Paras Ship Breakers Ltd installed an 8‑metric‑tonne induction furnace but, due to insufficient power supply from the Gujarat State Electricity Board, claimed it had reduced the furnace capacity to 4.5 MT and sought a lower deemed annual production under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act. The …
Mis. Mercantile Company received raw chemicals from Mis. T. Paul & Sons, supplied by Mis. Philips India Ltd., and carried out filtering, repacking into 50 ml containers, labeling and marketing them as distinct cleaning products. The Central Excise authorities classified these goods under sub‑heading …
M/s Wimco Ltd., a manufacturer of printed paper board boxes, sold waste/scrap/parings generated during production without filing a classification list under Rule 173B or issuing invoices under Rule 52A. The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice and demanded excise duty of Rs 23.20 million with an equal …
Prabir Banerjee, a Group‑B Superintendent in the Central Excise Department, was transferred from the Bhopal zone to the Nagpur Commissionerate under an office order. He challenged the transfer, arguing that circulars dated 19 Feb 2004 and 9 Mar 2004 prohibited inter‑zonal transfers, making the order …
The case concerned the customs tariff classification of a signal decoder used by a cable operator to decode satellite signals received via a dish antenna. The Revenue (Commissioner of Customs) argued that the decoder should be classified under Entry 8528 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as a …
The Commissioner of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice alleging that Mis Frick India Ltd. had undervalued compressors and overvalued the accessories supplied separately, thereby evading excise duty. The assessee argued that the fly‑wheel, safety valve and filter were separate goods …
Damnet Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. manufactured two products, ‘CRC 2-26’ and ‘CRC Acryform’, and claimed exemption from central excise duty under Notification No. 120/84‑CE (blended lubricating oil) and Notification No. 175/86‑CE (SSI) respectively. The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice …
The respondent, Mis. Sri Ganganagar Bottling Co., a small‑scale industrial (SSI) unit, manufactured aerated water and affixed the brand name "Citra" belonging to M/s Limca Flavours and Fragrances Ltd., which was also an SSI unit eligible for exemption under Notification No.1/93‑CE. The Revenue …
The appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, challenged the assessment of duty on pulp transferred by the respondent, Mis. Ballarpur Industries Ltd., to its sister unit for captive use in making paper, an exempted final product. The assessee had claimed MODVAT credit on inputs and paid duty on the …
Continental Foundation Joint Venture Holding and two other construction firms were alleged by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, to be manufacturing Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) instead of "mix concrete" and thus liable to excise duty under Chapter 3824.20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, …
The Supreme Court examined the scope of Sections 4 and 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in relation to the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and its Packaged Commodities Rules. It held that Section 4A applies only when five conditions are satisfied: the goods are excisable, sold in …
The All India Federation of Tax Practitioners challenged the levy of service tax on chartered accountants, cost accountants and architects under the Finance Acts of 1994 and 1998, arguing that such tax fell within State List Entry 60 (taxes on professions) and was barred by Article 276. The Supreme …
Ibex Gallagher Pvt. Ltd. assembles a solar electric power fencing system at various sites using a mix of duty‑paid and bought‑out components. The Commissioner of Central Excise held that the assembly creates a new product distinct from its parts, classifying it under tariff sub‑heading 8543.90 and …
Mis Elgi Equipments Ltd., a manufacturer of service‑station equipment, claimed a uniform 20% trade discount on its sales to distributors, while giving an 8% discount to sub‑dealers and a 12% commission to the distributors. The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice alleging a …
Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. operated a composite mill where yarn was spun and grey fabrics were woven but not further processed. Under Notification No. 14/2002‑CE, such grey fabrics are exempt from excise duty (nil rate) provided (i) duty on the yarn input is paid before claiming the exemption …
Mis. Swan Mills Ltd., a textile manufacturer, was served with show‑cause notices for differential excise duty and challenged the assessment before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). The appellant filed a declaration under Section 89 of the Finance Act, 1998 to avail the Kar Vivad Samadhan …
The case concerned whether Mis. Solaris Chemtech Ltd. could claim MODVAT credit under Rule 57A for Low Sulphur Heavy Stock (LSHS) and furnace oil used to generate electricity that was captively consumed in the manufacture of cement and caustic soda. The Revenue argued that electricity generation is …
The appellant, HMT Ltd., a manufacturer of dairy machinery, classified its machines such as pasteurizers, chillers, pumps, separators and butter packing machines under Chapter 84.34 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The revenue authorities issued show‑cause notices alleging mis‑classification …
Paper Products Ltd., a manufacturer of printed flexible packaging, was found by the Central Excise authorities to have omitted the cost of its printing cylinders from the assessable value of its laminates and pouches, leading to a demand for additional duty and a penalty. The Tribunal remanded the …
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala appealed against the High Court’s order allowing Tara Agencies to claim a weighted deduction under Section 35B(IA) of the Income Tax Act for export‑related expenses. Tara Agencies purchased various grades of tea, blended them, and exported the blended product. …
The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice to Mis Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (BBPL) alleging fraudulent availing of Small Scale Industry (SSI) exemption under Notification Nos. 175/86 and 1/93 in conspiracy with AMPL and PEL. The Commissioner of Central Excise dropped the …
The appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, issued a show‑cause notice in 2000 alleging that Pepsi Foods Ltd had evaded excise duty on sales tax collected. Pepsi had earlier claimed a sales‑tax exemption which was rejected, paid excise duty on a reduced price, and later, while the …
Ambica Industries, carrying on business in Lucknow, was assessed to central excise there and appealed to the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in Delhi, which has jurisdiction over Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and Maharashtra. The appellant filed a further appeal under Section 35G …
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore appealed against the CEGAT order that held no excise duty was payable on the erection of boiler, membrane‑cell and solvent‑extraction plants assembled on site by Mis Cethar Vessels Ltd. The core issue was whether such assembly created immovable property or …
Mis Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. melted aluminium ingots and added alloys to produce aluminium billets, which were used captively for irrigation pipe manufacture (exempt) and also sold in the open market. The Commissioner of Central Excise demanded excise duty on the billets, holding that the conversion …
Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd imported two generator sets, one of which was received on 24 Oct 1998 but not installed until after 1 Apr 2000. At the time of receipt Rule 57Q(3) of the Central Excise Rules applied, allowing up to 75% credit, but the Rules were amended on 1 Apr 2000 by Rule 57AC which …
Larsen & Tubro Ltd entered into a bridge‑construction contract for the Konkan Railway and manufactured pre‑stressed concrete (PSC) girders without registering under the Central Excise Act. A first show‑cause notice (SCN) issued under Section 11IA demanding excise duty for March 1993‑December 1994 …
The appellant‑assessee, Mis. Span Diagnostics Ltd., manufactures monoclonal antibodies (MABs), pregnancy test kits, and other diagnostic reagents. The Department classified these products under Chapter 30.05 or Chapter 38.22 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, while the assessee claimed …
Pragati Silicones Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of plastic name plates for motor vehicles, sought classification of its products under headings 87.08 and 87.14 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as "parts and accessories" of vehicles. The revenue department re‑classified the plates under heading …
The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices to Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd (CPC) demanding excise duty on Refinery Fuel Oil (RFO) used to produce naptha, sulphur and electricity. CPC, a government‑owned refinery declared a "deemed warehouse", argued that naptha and sulphur are …
Mis. Virlon Textile Mills Ltd., a 100% export‑oriented unit manufacturing polyester yarn, sold its products against foreign exchange in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) under permission granted by para 9.10(b) of the Export‑Import Policy (1997‑2002). The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice demanding …
Matsushita Television & Audio (I) Ltd. entered into a technical know‑how agreement with Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd. (MEI) under which it paid a royalty of 3% on the net ex‑factory sale price of colour TV sets. The net price included the cost of imported components used in the TVs. The …
Mis Crane Betel Nut Powder Works processed betel nuts by crushing them into small pieces and adding essential/non‑essential oils, menthol and sweetening agents. The company sought re‑classification of its product from Chapter 2107 (betel nut powder) to Chapter 0801.00 (betel nut powder known as …
Amrit Agro Industries Ltd., a manufacturer of various namkeens, claimed that roasted peanuts and moongfali masala mazedar fell under Heading 21.08 and were therefore exempt from excise duty under Notification No. 4/97-C.E. The Central Excise Department accepted the exemption for aloo bhujia and …
Meghraj Biscuits Industries Ltd. manufactured biscuits and sold them under the brand name “Meghraj” from 1991. The brand name was a registered trademark of Kay Aar Biscuits (P) Ltd., which also used it for biscuits. The Central Excise Department held that the appellant was not eligible for the Small …
Mis Mil India Ltd, a manufacturer of plant and equipment for soaps and detergents, entered into composite contracts with Godrej Soaps Ltd and Galaxy Surfactants Ltd to supply both its own equipment and duty‑paid bought‑out items such as motor‑pumps and heat exchangers directly to the sites. The …
S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. and another challenged the excise authority's order quantifying duty and imposing a penalty on limestone chips. The High Court set aside the penalty but left the duty demand untouched. On appeal, the appellants argued that the High Court should also have struck down the duty …
Alpesh Na Vinchandra Shah and his brother were arrested for mis‑declaring import consignments and evading customs duty. Both were detained under section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act. They later applied for settlement under section 1278 of the Customs Act; the Settlement Commission accepted full duty …
The Supreme Court examined whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment bars a refund claim when excise duty was paid under protest. Birla Corp Ltd, a cement manufacturer, had paid duty under protest and later sought a refund, arguing that the duty was not passed on to customers. The CEGAT had held …
Suchitra Components Ltd. appealed against a Tribunal order that required it to pay excise duty from 1 March 1990. The appellant argued that, under the Central Excise Act, the liability should arise only from the date the show‑cause notice was issued on 29 August 1990. The Supreme Court referred to …
Triveni Chemicals Ltd., a manufacturer of adhesive, deposited excise duty under protest and later obtained a classification that made the product exempt, prompting it to seek a refund of the duty paid. The initial refund application was rejected, but the appellate authority allowed the refund; …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the CEGAT order that refrigeration, cold storage, central air‑conditioning and caustic soda plants assembled at site are not excisable goods. The appellants contended that assembling duty‑paid components into a new marketable plant creates a new …
The assessee, Nirmala Dyachem, manufactures a product called Domex Power Cleaner/Domex All round Home Cleaner and classified it under heading 38.08 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as a disinfectant. The Revenue argued that the product should be placed under heading 34.02, which covers organic …
The Central Excise Department levied large duty and penalty demands on Mis. Benara Automotives Pvt. Ltd. (BAPL) and Mis. Benara Valves Ltd. (BVL) for alleged clandestine removal of excisable goods. The appellants appealed before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and sought a stay …
The respondent, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd., manufactured a hair oil called "Alma Lio" and initially classified it as an Ayurvedic medicament under SH 3003.39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the product should be …
The Supreme Court considered whether a show‑cause notice under Section 11‑A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 can be issued before the completion of the assessment proceedings. The appellants argued that a provisional assessment, being an order of assessment, sufficed for invoking Section 11‑A, while …
Craft Interiors Pvt. Ltd. installed storage units, kitchen counters, running counters and large reception tables as part of turnkey interior projects. The Central Excise authorities treated these items as "furniture" under Tariff Item 9403 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and levied excise …
Allied Air‑Conditioning Corp manufactured package‑type air conditioners that were cleared in a knocked‑down condition and assembled on site. The Commissioner of Central Excise alleged duty evasion and invoked the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11(A) of the Central Excise …
M/s. Panihati Rubber Ltd., a manufacturer of hose pipes supplied to Indian Railways, paid central excise duty under protest after the goods were classified under sub‑heading 4009.92 despite its claim that they should fall under 4009.99 with nil duty. The company sought a refund of the duty paid, …
Punjab Laminates Pvt. Ltd. manufactured paper‑based decorative laminated sheets and classified them under Chapter 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Commissioner of Central Excise argued that the goods should fall under sub‑heading 4823.90 of Chapter 48 and that the exemption under …
Mis. Duncans Industries Ltd., a cigarette manufacturer, was served with two show‑cause notices covering the period July 1973‑February 1983, one by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta and another by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi. The Assistant Collector incorporated the …
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. operated an electrical and mechanical workshop at Korba to repair mining equipment for adjacent coal mines. The Central Government had declared the workshop a "mine" under Section 82 of the Mines Act, 1952. The assessee claimed exemption from central excise duty under …
M/S Sonebhadra Fuels, which manufactures coal briquettes (coal tikli), sought exemption/rebate of sales tax on the basis that the briquettes were the same commodity as coal, which had already been taxed. The Assessing Authority, Appellate Authority and the Sales Tax Tribunal rejected the claim, …
Mis RE manufactured electronic fan regulators under the brand "REIZ" since 1988, while its sister company Mis REPL, formed in 1993, manufactured electronic transformers using the same brand. Under Notification No. 1/93, a manufacturer using another's brand name is ineligible for small‑scale …
Amrit Paper, a manufacturer of paper, claimed exemption from central excise duty for March 2000 under Notification No. 6/2000‑CE. The company initially availed Modvat credit on input duty and cleared the goods at nil rate, but later reversed the credit, paid the duty and sought a refund of the …
The assessee, Action Construction Equipment Ltd., manufactured mobile cranes but used a dummy unit, ACE Industries, to claim exemption and evade excise duty. The adjudicating authority fixed an assessable value of Rs 26,63,400 and duty of Rs 4,10,144; the appellate authority, relying on the Supreme …
The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged Carrier Aircon Ltd's classification of its chillers under tariff heading 84.18 (refrigerating or freezing equipment) instead of heading 84.15 (air‑conditioning machines). The Revenue argued that because more than 90% of the chillers were used as integral …
Quinn India Ltd manufactured a product called Penetrator 4893, originally classified under tariff item 68 and later under 3801.19. In 1986 the company re‑classified it under heading 3402.90 as a wetting (surface‑active) agent, relying on reports from a Chemical Examiner and the Chief Chemist of the …
The Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs appealed against a tribunal order that held M/s Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd.'s polished ceramic tiles were not "glazed" and therefore not liable for differential excise duty. The assessee manufactures both polished (glossy) and unpolished tiles, initially …
H.P.L. Chemicals Ltd., a manufacturer of hydrazine, produced a by‑product called "denatured salt" and claimed it should be classified under heading 25.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which carries a nil duty rate. The Deputy Commissioner classified the product under heading 38.23 (now …
Hindustan Poles Corporation imported duty‑paid electric‑resistant steel pipes and welded three pipes of different diameters together to form stepped transmission poles. The Central Excise authorities issued show‑cause notices asserting that this welding created a new product liable to excise under …
M/s North West Switchgear Ltd and M/s Kesharbai Electronics manufactured fan regulators and classified them under sub‑heading 8414.20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, claiming they are electric fans. The revenue issued show‑cause notices alleging short payment of duty, arguing that the …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal’s dismissal of his appeal challenging the exemption granted to M/s Hira Cement, a small‑scale industry (SSI), under Notification No.1193‑CE dated 28‑Feb‑1993. The issue was whether Hira Cement’s …
M/s Motor Industries Co. Ltd., a manufacturer of nozzles, nozzle holders and injectors, was served a show‑cause notice demanding central excise duty on its nozzles and nozzle holders used in the assembly of injectors, the department alleging they were intermediate products under tariff heading …
Vikram Cement sought CENVAT credit for explosives used in quarrying limestone, which were later used in cement production, despite the explosives never entering its factory. The issue was whether the earlier Supreme Court decision in Jaypee Rewa Cement, which allowed MODVAT credit for such inputs, …
Anjaleem Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of a computer‑based STD‑PCO unit, appealed against the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad, challenging the inclusion of the value of a programmed EPROM in the assessable value of the unit and seeking exemption under Notification No.84/89 which …
Siddhartha Tubes Ltd manufactured MS pipes and subsequently galvanized them before clearing the finished product from its factory. The company argued that galvanization was not a manufacturing process and therefore its cost should not be added to the assessable value of the pipes. The Commissioner …
Siddartha Tubes Ltd., a manufacturer of m.s./g.i. pipes, purchased sockets from the market and had them fitted by Madhya Pradesh Laghu Udyog Nigam Ltd. The company claimed a deduction for the cost of the sockets and the service charges incurred in fitting them under Rule 173‑C of the Central Excise …
Maharshi Ayurveda Corporation Ltd manufactured a tonic called “Herbonic”, a mixture of vegetables, nuts, seeds and other plant parts, and claimed nil excise duty under heading 2001.90 of Chapter 20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Revenue argued that the product should be classified under …
Procter & Gamble manufactured detergent powder (AMS) in 25 kg bulk packs at its Bhopal plant and sent the powder to an independent job‑worker, IED, for repacking into 20 g and 30 g sachets. The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the assessee had suppressed the true price of the product …
The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged the valuation method used by Mis. S. Kumars Ltd. for processed grey fabric. The respondent sometimes processed fabric on its own account and sometimes on a job‑work basis for "merchant manufacturers". For 1‑Sept‑1985 to 28‑Feb‑1989 it valued the …
The Supreme Court examined whether manufacturers of chewing tobacco could claim input relief under exemption Notification No.121/94‑CE when they had not complied with the Chapter X procedure of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The assessees argued that the intended use of the intermediate product …
The appellants, manufacturers of chewing tobacco, used an intermediate product called "additive mixture" (kimam) in their production process. The Central Excise Department alleged that the kimam was clandestinely manufactured and cleared under sub‑headings 2404.49/2404.40 of the Central Excise …
M/s Aldec Corporation purchased aluminium sheets and sent them to two job processors, VPI and SREW, for slitting, re‑rolling and painting, after which Aldec sold the painted aluminium slats (PAS) for venetian blinds. The Central Excise Department, relying on earlier decisions that slitting and …
Anand Nishikawa Co. Ltd., a manufacturer of rubber profiles, classified its products under sub‑heading 4008.29 of the Central Excise Tariff, attracting nil duty. The Revenue re‑classified them under sub‑heading 4016.19, alleging that the company had not disclosed post‑forming processes (notching, …
The petitioners, job‑workers manufacturing cigarettes under exemption notifications issued in 1999, were ordered by the High Court to receive refunds of excise duty. After the High Court upheld the refunds, Parliament enacted Section 154 of the Finance Act, 2003, retrospectively withdrawing the …
Vikram Cement, a cement manufacturer, claimed CENVAT credit for duty paid on inputs (explosives, lubricating oil, welding electrodes) and capital goods (limestone crusher, mining equipment) used in its captive limestone mines adjacent to its factory. The department issued show‑cause notices …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against a Tribunal order that had allowed IFGT Refractories Ltd. to treat a benefit obtained under the Duty Exemption Scheme as a statutory benefit, not as part of the price for excise duty. IFGT had sold refractories to Visakhapatnam Steel Plant; the …
The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged Mis. S.R. Tissues Pvt. Ltd. for cutting and slitting duty‑paid jumbo rolls of tissue paper into smaller rolls, napkins and facial tissues, alleging that this constituted "manufacture" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and attracted duty …
Mis Apex Traders, a manufacturer of aerated water, filed a declaration of assessable value under Rule 173‑C claiming deductions for equalized freight and rent on containers (ROC). The Assistant Commissioner allowed the ROC deduction but treated the factory‑gate price as the assessable value for …
Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of aerated water, obtained concentrate from a Coca‑Cola subsidiary and collected rent on empty containers (ROC) from dealers while also receiving price‑support incentives in the form of credit notes from the concentrate supplier. The Central Excise …
The appellant, a partnership engaged in manufacturing chewing tobacco, produced a compound called "kimam" in unregistered and unlicensed factories and claimed it was an intermediate, non‑marketable product not liable to excise duty. The Revenue Department contended that kimam was a distinct, …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against a judgment of the Central Excise, Customs and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) which had allowed Mis. Grasim Industries Ltd., a subsidiary, to claim exemption under Notification No. 5/98‑CE. The subsidiary printed on its cement bags the …
Channy Enterprises operates two hot‑rolled steel mills, each equipped with its own reheating furnace. After installing a second furnace (with a single motor that prevents simultaneous operation), the Commissioner, relying on the 26‑February‑1998 circular, fixed the unit’s Annual Capacity of …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against Mis. Aka Y Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd., which claimed deductions from assessable value for special packing, turnover tax, octroi, and bought‑out items while the assessable value was based on the selling price to a related person under proviso (iii) of Sec. …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the Tribunal’s order allowing Mis Akay Cosmetics (P) Ltd. to deduct seven categories of expenditure from the assessable value of its instant hair‑colour product for the period 1988‑1993. The Tribunal had remanded the question of whether Akay …
Noble Synth Ltd, a small-scale manufacturer of acrylic polymers, initially classified its products under SI No.42 of Notification No.53/88 (40% duty) and later claimed a clerical error to re‑classify them as emulsions under SI No.9 (20% duty). The revised classification was approved, but a …
Universal Glass Ltd., a manufacturer of glass bottles, supplied 50% of its output to its parent company Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (JIL) for captive consumption and sold the remainder to independent industrial buyers. The assessee valued the bottles sold to JIL by referencing prices charged to the …
Kirloskar Brothers Ltd filed two price lists for its compressors, one showing a lower price for sales to alleged bulk buyers. The revenue authorities disallowed the lower price, contending that bulk buyers could not be distinguished from other wholesale buyers and that only one price could be …
Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. manufactured parts of locomotive wagons and rolling stock at its Growth Shop in Adityapur and transferred them to its main plant in Jamshedpur for repair and maintenance of transport equipment used within the factory. The assessee claimed exemption under Notification No. …
Castrol India Ltd manufactured a blended lubricating oil called ‘Super TT’ with a flash point below 94°C and classified it under tariff heading 2710.99, claiming exemption under Notification 120/84‑CE which exempts blended or compounded lubricating oils. The Central Excise Department argued that the …
Mis. Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. manufactured textile printing adhesives and claimed exemption under Notification No. 1/1993 (as amended) and Notification No. 16/1997. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices alleging that the company used a foreign logo, suppressing facts and …
The Supreme Court examined whether silver chloride, an intermediate product generated during Hindustan Zinc Ltd.'s zinc manufacturing process, is liable to excise duty. The Court reiterated that excise duty applies only when an item is both manufactured and commercially marketable. While the …
Sidheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., a cooperative sugar manufacturer, claimed a rebate under Notification No. 132/82 for excess sugar production in May‑September 1982, calculating average production over three years (including two years of nil output) as 11,009.67 quintals. The revenue …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against CEGAT orders that excluded the cost of wooden crates used to pack glass sheets from the assessable value. The respondents, Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd., argued that the glass could be sold without such packing and that wooden crates were not …
Mis. W.P.1.L. Ltd., a manufacturer of power driven pumps, challenged demand notices for excise duty on parts of pumps used in its own factory between 1 March and 21 April 1994. The appellant argued that such parts had been exempt from duty since 1978 and that the omission of this exemption in the …
D.C.L. Polyester Ltd., a manufacturer of polyester chips, claimed that chips spilled during bagging were "sweeping wastes" and should be classified under heading 39.15 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, attracting nil duty. The Revenue argued that the chips were primary forms of plastic under …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the exemption claimed by M/s Ginni Filaments Ltd., a 100% Export Oriented Unit manufacturing filament yarn, for items such as air‑conditioner sheets, tables and chairs. The assessee had obtained a CT‑3 certificate under Notification No. 123/81‑CE …
The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs appealed against the classification of rubberised tyre cord fabric manufactured by Mis. CEA T Ltd., arguing that it should be taxed under tariff heading 59.02 rather than 59.06. The appellate court examined the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 …
The Central Excise Department appealed against M/s. CEAT Ltd. challenging the classification of dipped tyre cord fabric for excise duty. The Tribunal and the Commissioner had classified the fabric under specific tariff headings, but the Supreme Court examined whether it should fall under Tariff …
The Central Excise Department issued a show‑cause notice to Mis Bajaj Tempo Ltd demanding duty on advertisement expenses that the manufacturer initially incurred and later recovered from its dealers, invoking the extended period of limitation under Section 1IA(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The …
OK Play India Ltd., a manufacturer of plastic water tanks and toys, pulverised LDPE and HDPE granules into moulding powder. The Central Excise Department issued show‑cause notices demanding duty for two periods, alleging that the conversion was a "manufacture" and that the powder was an excisable …
O.K. Play (India) Ltd., a toy manufacturer, classified activity desks, chairs, play tables, swings, slides, fun fliers, rockers and a play pool as "toys" under Central Excise Tariff Heading 95.03 and cleared them without duty. The Central Excise Department, after approving the classification list, …
M.R.F. Ltd. manufactures tyres and uses grey tyre‑cord fabric that is dipped in a latex solution before being incorporated into tyres. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices alleging that the dipped tyre‑cord fabric was a separate excisable product falling under Central Excise …
Mis. Eswaran and Sons Engineers Ltd manufactured Minimum Oil Circuit Breakers and had been paying excise duty by classifying them under tariff sub‑heading 8535. The Department issued show‑cause notices in 1993‑94 seeking reclassification to sub‑heading 8537 and the Assistant Collector reclassified …
M.K. Kotecha, a manufacturer of RCC pipes and collars, cleared the goods to lift‑irrigation schemes between April 1990 and June 1992, claiming they were captively consumed and filing a price‑list under Part VI(a) stating that comparable prices were not known. In reality, the appellant used a …
Sarabhai M. Chemicals, a bulk‑drug manufacturer, claimed exemption from excise duty under Notification No. 234/86 after obtaining certificates from the Drugs Controller. The Central Excise Department issued three show‑cause notices alleging that a portion of the sorbitol solution and vitamin C was …
The appeal before the Supreme Court concerned the method of calculating the cost of production for excisable products under the Central Excise Act. Two questions were posed: whether excise duty paid on raw material, if modvatted, should be included in the cost of production, and whether the profit …
The Commissioner of Central Excise (Pondicherry) challenged Acer India Ltd.'s practice of deducting the value of operational software from the assessable value of computers for central excise purposes. The Revenue argued that the software, being loaded in the hardware, formed part of the computer …
ITC Ltd, a cigarette manufacturer, printed the maximum retail price (MRP) on its packs as required by the Standards of Weights and Measures Act and the Packaged Commodities Rules. The Revenue alleged that the printed MRP was false, that ITC under‑priced its cigarettes to evade excise duty, and …
J.K. Udaipur Udyog Ltd., a cement manufacturer, operated its own limestone mine and used explosives for blasting in the mine. It claimed CENVAT credit for the explosives under Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue argued that the explosives were not "inputs" because they were not …
Eagle Flask Industries Ltd, a manufacturer of plastic insulated wares and vacuum flasks, claimed exemption from central excise duty and licensing control under Notification 11/88 (NT) CE dated 15‑04‑1988 and Notification 53/88, which exempted certain plastic items. The company failed to file the …
Escorts Ltd., a tractor manufacturer, paid excise duty on inputs used to produce parts and transferred those parts to another factory of the same company under Notification No. 217/86-CE. The parts were then used to manufacture tractors on which duty was paid. The Commissioner of Central Excise …
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Bombay issued a show‑cause notice to M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. alleging short payment of excise duty on polyester filament yarn (POY) that was produced on bobbins of one kilogram or less and removed without duty payment. The Collector confirmed a demand of over …
The Commissioner of Central Excise held that Modi Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd. (MACL) had created three front companies to evade excise duty on hydrogen gas, treating them as dummies and imposing duty, penalty and confiscation. The Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) overturned …
The appellants, 100% Export Oriented Undertakings (EOUs) manufacturing cotton yarn from indigenous raw material, were required to pay Basic Excise Duty (BED) under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Additional Excise Duty (AED) under the Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act, …
M/s Rollatainers Ltd owned two distinct factories – a Paper Board Factory in Shed No.1 and a Specialty Paper Factory in Shed No.3 – each with its own plant, staff, management and premises‑specific registration under Rule 174(3) of the Central Excise Rules. Both factories claimed the nil‑rate …
T.T.G. Industries Ltd. entered into a contract with Bhilai Steel Plant to design, supply, and erect hydraulic mudguns and tap‑hole drilling machines. Components were imported and some were manufactured at its Chennai factory, then shipped to the steel plant where they were assembled on a concrete …
A Infrastructure Ltd., a manufacturer supplying goods to Government and public sector undertakings, claimed deductions for interest on delayed payments (3‑12 months) and bank/collection charges under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessing authority, appellate authority and the …
Sony India Ltd, a colour‑television manufacturer, cleared packed TVs from its factory without printing the maximum retail price, affixing the price later at its depots and offering free gifts to buyers. The Central Excise authority demanded duty at the 18% ad valorem rate (based on the printed …
Mentha & Allied Products Ltd manufactured menthol under a licence granted under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and claimed exemption from central excise duty under Notification No. 31188‑CE, which exempts "bulk drugs" as defined in the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1987. The Central Excise Collector …
Tecumseh Products India Ltd repaired compressors by replacing stators. The stators were fabricated by external job workers and then received by the company, which performed shaping, varnishing and baking before fitting them into compressors. The Central Excise Collector treated these activities as …
Muller & Phipps (India) Ltd. appealed against the Central Excise Tribunal’s classification of its Johnson’s Prickly Heat Powder and Phipps Processed Talc as cosmetics/toilet preparations under tariff heading 33.04. The Collector (Appeals) had classified them as patent or proprietary medicines under …
U.C. Bhandari, a manufacturer of water‑proof fabrics, appealed against the Commissioner of Central Excise, challenging the classification of its products under Tariff Heading 52.07 (cotton fabrics water‑proofed) instead of Heading 59.06 (impregnated, coated fabrics). The Tribunal had held that the …
The respondents, Hindustan Zinc Ltd., manufacture zinc by electrolysis using lead and aluminium sheets fitted with headers to form anodes and cathodes. The Revenue issued show‑cause notices for excise duty and penalty, asserting that the fitted sheets constitute a new product—electrodes—liable to …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the refund granted to Mis Allied Photographies India Ltd (the sole distributor of New India Industries Ltd) for excise duty paid by the manufacturer under protest. The Court examined whether duty paid under protest falls under Section 11B of the …
The Supreme Court examined whether administrative charges collected by a sugar factory under the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964 are "other taxes" under section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and therefore excluded from the assessable value of molasses. The Court held …
The respondents, manufacturers of steel sheets, generate zinc dross and flux skimming as waste during the galvanisation process. The Revenue treated these residues as marketable commodities, issuing show‑cause notices for excise duty and penalty. The assessees argued that the residues are merely …
The Commissioner of Customs issued a show‑cause notice to Indian Oil Corporation alleging that the company had misdeclared the value of imported petroleum products by including demurrage charges paid to ship owners. The Revenue demanded additional customs duty and penalty, but the Customs Excise and …
The Collector of Central Excise assessed additional duty on Orient Fabrics for alleged mis‑disclosure and undervaluation of fabric, also ordered confiscation of 35 bales and imposed a penalty. The Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, holding that the Central …
ITW Signode India Ltd., a manufacturer of box‑strappings from duty‑paid cold‑rolled steel strips, claimed that the product fell under tariff item 26AA(iii) and no further excise duty was payable. The Revenue argued that the product should be re‑classified under tariff item 68/7308.90 and that a …
Colfax Laboratories manufactured after‑shave lotions (ASL) under a licence for cosmetics. In 1985 it sought re‑classification of the product as a "medicinal preparation" to obtain a lower excise duty; the Excise Commissioner classified it as medicinal, a decision later challenged. The State issued …
M/S T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd. filed a refund claim after the final assessment of excise duty. The Assistant Commissioner rejected it on limitation grounds, but the Commissioner of Central Excise reversed the decision, and the CEGAT affirmed the reversal. The Revenue appealed, arguing that a proviso added …
The Union of India (Revenue) issued a show‑cause notice under Section 11‑A of the Central Excise Act alleging clandestine removal of goods and incorrect valuation of Indalco Industries’ aluminium products. The High Court dismissed the part of the notice dealing with clandestine removal but quashed …
The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against orders of the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal that had held that notional interest on interest‑free advances taken by manufacturers from buyers could not be added to the assessable value of excisable goods. The revenue argued …
The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from show‑cause notices issued under the Central Excise Act, 1944 to G.T.C. Industries Ltd. and its alleged front company. A partner of the front company gave oral submissions before the Collector, who relied on those statements to pass an adverse …
The Collector of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice to Guru Nanak Refrigeration Corp. alleging that the cost of production of its refrigeration parts exceeded the wholesale price and sought recovery of differential excise duty. The wholesale price had been approved by the excise authorities …
Jalaram Wood Crafts (P) Ltd., a small‑scale manufacturer of plywood and related products, claimed exemption under Notification No. 217/86 for inputs (glue, UF resin, wood veneer) while its final products were already exempt under Notification No. 175/86 up to an aggregate value of Rs 20 lakh. The …
Escorts Ltd. and Goetze (India) Ltd., manufacturers of tractors, sold 60% of their tractors to stockists at a 27.5% discount and 40% to sub‑stockists at a 25% discount. They passed the 2.5% differential discount on to the stockists and claimed it as a deductible trade discount when valuing the goods …
The Collector of Central Excise appealed against Mis. Universal Electrical Industries, a small‑scale manufacturer of electric appliances, seeking to deny the exemption under Notification No. 175/1986. The issue was how to compute the aggregate value of clearances for the exemption, specifically …
The appellant, a cooperative sugar factory, claimed a rebate under Central Excise Notification No. 135/83 CE based on the average sugar production during the three preceding lean years (1979‑80, 1980‑81, 1981‑82). It had produced sugar only in 1979‑80 and nil in the other two years. The Revenue …
M/s P & B Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd., a small‑scale manufacturer of patent and proprietary medicines, used the logo "P/B" assigned by M/s P & B Laboratories Ltd. The Central Excise authorities issued several show‑cause notices alleging that its distributor was a related person and that the logo was …
T.N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals obtained exemption under Notification No. 116/69 for its drug Darzamol Injection, which contains Metronidazole and Dextrose. The Revenue later alleged that Dextrose, not being a pharmaceutical necessity or therapeutically inert, was suppressed in the classification list, …
The Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh issued a show‑cause notice to Mis. Smith Kline Beecham Consumer Health Care Ltd. demanding recovery of excise duty that had been set‑off under Notification No. 201/79 after the sellers of the inputs obtained a refund of duty paid. The assessee contended …
Flash Laboratories Ltd, a toothpaste manufacturer, sold 60% of its output to its holding company Parle Products Ltd and the remaining 40% to another subsidiary, Parle Biscuits Ltd. The Central Excise authorities issued show‑cause notices alleging that the three entities were "related persons" under …
I.T.C. Ltd., a cigarette manufacturer, was served with show‑cause notices for removing 20 sticks from each machine daily as samples for quality‑control testing, without paying excise duty. The company argued that excise duty should not apply because the cigarettes were not yet packed, a step it …
The North‑Eastern Tobacco Co. Ltd, after closing its earlier cigarette unit at Bangagarh under a disinvestment agreement, set up a new manufacturing unit at the Export Promotion Industrial Park in Amingaon in 1999 and sought exemption from central excise duty under the Exemption Notification dated …
Escorts JCB Ltd., a manufacturer of excavators, sold its goods on an ex‑works basis at its Ballabgarh factory, handing over possession to the buyer's carrier. The Central Excise authorities, after a factory visit, observed that transit‑insurance and freight charges were not included in the declared …
The dispute concerned the classification of technical grade pesticides (TGP) under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Prior to 1996, TGP and insecticides in bulk were placed in tariff heading 38.08. Amendments to Chapter 38 in 1996 and 1997 and a 1997 circular directed that such chemicals be …
The Central Excise Commissioners issued show‑cause notices to Apollo Tyres Ltd. and its directors/officers for alleged duty evasion and imposed penalties. Both the company and the officers appealed before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, and while the appeals were pending, …
The assessee, I.T.E.C. (P) Ltd., sold projectors to Mis. International Talkie Equipment Co. Pvt. Ltd. and claimed exemption under Notification 71178. The Revenue issued a notice under Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise Act, alleging Mis. International was a "related person" and demanded excise …
Bhupindra Steels Ltd, a manufacturer of ingots, claimed exemption from excise duty under Notification No. 208/83, asserting that the "ends of M.S. Flats" used as inputs fell within sub‑item 8 of the notification. The Central Excise authorities rejected the claim; the Collector (Appeals) allowed it, …
The Supreme Court heard appeals by the Union of India against the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order quashing excise duty notices served on Sonic Electrochem Ltd. for the plastic body of its electro‑mosquito repellent (EMR) and a "fragrant mat". The issues were whether the plastic body constituted …
Sodani Cement and Chemicals (P) Ltd., a small‑scale industry (SSI) manufacturing ordinary Portland cement, sought the benefit of Notification No. 23/1989‑CE which exempts cement produced in a vertical shaft kiln with a licensed capacity not exceeding 200 tonnes per day from the normal excise duty of …
Jaypee Rewa Cement, a cement manufacturer, used explosives to mine limestone, an essential raw material. The explosives attracted excise duty, and the company claimed credit for this duty under Rule 57‑A of the Central Excise Rules, arguing that the explosives were inputs used in relation to the …
The Uttar Pradesh government imposed administrative charges on molasses sold by sugar factories under Section 8(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964. The Commissioner of Central Excise held that these charges should be included in the assessable value of molasses under the …
The appellants, Indian public corporations engaged in manufacturing, imported technical drawings, designs and manuals from foreign collaborators on media such as paper and diskettes under technical collaboration agreements. The Customs Commissioner issued show‑cause notices under Section 28(1) of …
The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs appealed against several manufacturers, including Mis. Venus Castings (P) Ltd., who had opted to pay excise duty under Rule 96ZO(3) (or 96ZP(3)) of the Central Excise Rules and subsequently claimed the abatement benefit under Section 3A(4) of the …
Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd., a subsidiary of Kolhapur Sugar Mills Ltd., was granted a sugar incentive rebate for the 1973‑74 season. The Excise authorities later issued a show‑cause notice under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, demanding recovery of the rebate, alleging it was …
Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar, then Collector of Central Excise, ordered confiscation of excisable goods and confirmed duty against Mis. Hari Vishnu Packaging Ltd. but did not impose a penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The Central Board of Excise directed him to appeal to the …
The petitioners, manufacturers including Eicher Motors Ltd., challenged Rule 57F(4A) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which mandated that MODVAT credit unutilised as on 16 March 1995 would lapse. They argued that the credit represented a vested right under the existing law and that Section 37 of …
Thermax Ltd. manufactured high‑pressure boilers and, in addition to the price of the boilers, separately charged customers for design, engineering, installation and commissioning services. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise and the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal held …
The Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, appealed against K.W.H. Heloplastics Ltd. for non‑payment of excise duty on plastic tanks and vats. The department classified the goods under Heading 39.25, Sub‑heading 3925.10 as "builders' ware" liable to duty, while the assessee claimed exemption under …
MIS. STP Ltd., a manufacturer of coal‑tar products, claimed exemption from excise duty under Notification 121/62‑CE which exempts ‘tar’ falling under Tariff Item 11(5). The Central Excise authority argued that the various pitches produced by the company were not ‘tar’ within that clause and …
The appellant, Mis Sun Export Corporation, imported six consignments of vitamin AD‑3 premix (feed grade) and claimed refund of customs and counter‑vailing duties on the ground that the product was an ‘animal feed’ covered by Notification No. 234/82‑CE, which exempts such goods. The Customs, Excise …
Balaji Enterprises, a manufacturer of aluminium containers, purchased aluminium ingots and processed them into circles and containers. During this process, aluminium scrap was generated. The Central Excise Authority demanded duty on the scrap under Central Excise Tariff Item 27(a)(i) (aluminium in …
The Assistant Collector of Customs appealed against Anam Electrical Manufacturing Co. challenging the levy of a ten‑percent surcharge and the handling of a refund claim under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court examined whether the surcharge could be upheld and, …
Gaekwar Mills Ltd manufactured a fabric consisting of 33% polyester, 32% viscose and 35% cotton. The Collector of Central Excise argued that the fabric should be classified as a cotton fabric under Item 19 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, while the CEGAT held that it fell under Item 22 for …
The Supreme Court examined whether cigarettes manufactured before 1 March 1978 but removed from the factory after that date were liable to the special excise duty introduced by Section 37 of the Finance Act, 1978. The respondent, a tobacco manufacturer, argued that excise duties are levied at the …
The assessees, M/s Steel Strips Ltd., manufactured cold‑rolled steel strips from hot‑rolled strips, which under Central Excise Tariff Item 26AA attracted a higher duty (Rs 650/MT) than hot‑rolled strips (Rs 450/MT). The excise authorities contended that the cold‑rolled strips were the result of a …
