Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
12 judgments · newest first · showing 1–12
The State of Bihar enacted notifications licensing the use, possession and sale of Ayurvedic medicinal preparations containing alcohol, after amending the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 to include such preparations within the definition of "intoxicant". Manufacturers challenged the constitutional validity …
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 …
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 …
The State of Gujarat issued demand notices for excise duty on Xylocaine and other medicinal preparations containing Xylocaine, invoking the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955. The assessees challenged the notices and the Gujarat High Court quashed them. On appeal, the …
B.P.L. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. manufactured a Selenium Sulfide Lotion (branded Selsun) containing 2.5% selenium sulfide, used for treating seborrhoeic dermatitis and tinea versicolor. The product was certified as a drug by the FDA, labelled with warnings, and marketed through chemists on prescription. …
Mis Astra Pharmaceuticals manufactured 20% dextrose injections, a drug listed in the Indian Pharmacopoeia and therefore exempt from central excise duty. The company marked its containers with the name "AP‑Astra", which the Revenue Department argued created a monogram establishing a relationship …
HICO Products Ltd., a manufacturer of medicinal silicone products such as dimethicone and simethicone, claimed that these goods should be classified under the residuary Tariff Item 68 and therefore be exempt from excise duty under government notifications of 1982. The Central Excise authorities …
The appellant, ESKA YEF Ltd., manufactured Bifuran Supplement, Neftin‑50 and Neftin‑200 and claimed they were exempt from central excise duty as "animal feed supplements" under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff, relying on a 1984 notification. The Revenue argued that the products contained …
Aphali Pharmaceuticals Ltd. manufactured an Ayurvedic product called "Ashvagandharist" which contained self‑generated alcohol but was not consumable as an ordinary alcoholic beverage. The company had previously enjoyed exemption from excise duty under item 3(i) of the Medicinal and Toilet …
The respondents, manufacturers of medicinal preparations using alcohol tincture, failed to pay excise duty and obtain a licence under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955. The Commercial Tax Officer issued demand notices under Rule 12 of the 1956 Rules to recover the …
Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. (the appellant) manufactured wheels, tyres and axles for Indian Railways, forging them and then machining and polishing to remove excess steel skin. The Revenue argued that the goods became a new commercial commodity after machining, making them liable to excise duty under …
Southern Pharmaceuticals and other manufacturers of medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol challenged the constitutional validity of sections 12A, 12B, 14(e), 14(f) and 68A of the Kerala Abkari Act, 1967 and related rules, arguing that the State lacked competence because the subject …
