Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Central Excise and Salt Act

3 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABADversusFENOPLAST (P) LTD. {II)

1994 INSC 22627 June 1994

The respondent, Fenoplast (P) Ltd., manufactures rexine cloth by coating 100% cotton fabric with PVC resin, plasticizers and fillers. It argued that because cotton constituted only 8% of the finished product, the cloth could not be classified as a "cotton fabric" under Tariff Item 19(III) of the Central Excise and Salt

ESSAR STEEL LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 32519 April 2016Dismissed

Essar Steel Ltd. and other off‑takers had long‑term contracts to purchase regasified LNG (RLNG) at a fixed price. In 2007 the Union Government issued a policy directive to pool RLNG prices and apply a uniform, non‑discriminatory price to all long‑term contracts, which raised the price for the appellants. The appellants

M/S. NATURALLE HEALTH PRODUCTS (P) LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD

2003 INSC 62311 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Naturalle Health Products (P) Ltd. manufactured medicated cough drops, throat drops, Sloan's balm and Sloan's rub under an Ayurvedic drug licence and claimed that the products should be classified under Chapter 3003.30 of the Central Excise Tariff as Ayurvedic medicaments, attracting nil duty. The Central Excise au

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search