M/S. ESCORTS LTD.versusCOMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, FARIDABAD
2015 INSC 37129 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether the transmission assembly, an intermediate component produced during the manufacture of tractors by M/s. Escorts Ltd., attracted excise duty under the Central Excise and Salt Act. The Court held that transmission assemblies are distinct, commercially known products and therefore quali…
M/S SHANTI FRAGRANCESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
2017 INSC 97121 September 2017Hearing Adjourned
The appeal concerned the taxability of pan masala containing tobacco (gutka) under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The central issue was whether the specific entry introducing "Pan Masala and Gutka" in the rate schedule overrode the general exe…
COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, KERALAversusM/S LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD.
2015 INSC 58920 August 2015Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether service tax could be levied on indivisible works contracts entered into after the Finance Act, 1994 but before the 2007 amendment that expressly made such contracts taxable. It held that the 1994 Act neither charged nor provided machinery to assess service tax on composite works contr…
AIDEK TOURISM SERVICES PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI
2015 INSC 23719 March 2015Disposed off
Aidek Tourism Services Pvt. Ltd., a tourism operator that runs taxis, imported Honda Accord saloon cars and claimed a 10% refund of Countervailing Duty (CVD) under Notification No. 64/93‑CE, which provides an additional exemption for saloon cars used solely as taxis. The Revenue argued that the exemption was available …
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHIversusM/S HARI CHAND SHRI GOPAL & OTHER
2010 INSC 78518 November 2010Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether manufacturers of excisable final products could claim exemption from excise duty on specified intermediate goods under Notification 121/94‑CE by relying on "intended use" and the doctrine of "substantial compliance" of Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules, despite not fulfilling the …
M/S. USHA RECTIFIER CORPN. (I) LTD. (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS M/S. USHA (I) LTD.)versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI
2011 INSC 4013 January 2011Dismissed
The appellant, a manufacturer of electronic equipment, fabricated testing machines worth Rs 31.27 lacs to test its own products and claimed they were for captive consumption and R&D, not liable to excise duty. The department issued a show‑cause notice and, after the appellant’s admissions in its balance sheet and reply…
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABADversusM/S. DETERGENTS INDIA LTD. & ANR.
2015 INSC 2938 April 2015Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined whether the holding company Shaw Wallace and its subsidiary Detergents India Ltd. were "related persons" under Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 and whether proviso (iii) to Section 4(1)(a) applied to the valuation of excisable goods sold at a lower price. The Court hel…
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPURversusM/S. ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD.
2015 INSC 7427 October 2015Dismissed
The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise challenged M/s Ispat Industries for allegedly evading excise duty by treating the buyer's premises as the place of removal and including freight and transit‑insurance charges in the assessable value for the period 28‑09‑1996 to 31‑03‑2003. The Court examined the evolution …
M/S SALORA INTERNATIGNAL LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI
2012 INSC 3847 September 2012Dismissed
MIS Salora International Ltd., a manufacturer of television components, assembled the parts into complete TV sets for testing, numbered and matched them, then disassembled the sets and shipped the parts to satellite units for final assembly. The Revenue classified the goods as "Television Receivers" under Tariff Entry …
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHIversusM/S. PEARL DRINKS LTD.
2010 INSC 3636 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed
Pearl Drinks Ltd. claimed eight deductions while computing excise duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner allowed six deductions and disallowed two; the company appealed and the tribunal, affirmed by the Supreme Court, upheld the disallowance of the two deductions. The Central Board of Excise and Cust…
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusR.K.B.K. LTD. & ANR.
2015 INSC 6434 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed
The State of West Bengal appealed against an order of the Director of Consumer Goods that imposed a penalty on R.K.B.K. Ltd., a licensed kerosene oil agent, for alleged excess distribution. The dispute centered on whether the Director or the District Magistrate had authority under Paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosen…