Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
13 judgments · newest first · showing 1–13
Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Pvt. Ltd (the appellant) challenged the Special Judge's order taking cognizance of alleged offences relating to the payment of Countervailing Duty (CVD) on invoice value instead of Maximum Retail Price (MRP). The company claimed that it had been granted …
The Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India challenged the applicability of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, its 1985 Enforcement Act and the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 to the sale of packaged water bottles served in hotels and restaurants at prices above the printed …
The appellant, Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, challenged the exemption granted to Mis Hindustan Lever Ltd under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, on the ground that the company fixed a uniform maximum retail price (MRP) for tea packets that were marked "inclusive of all taxes" despite …
GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd challenged notices issued by the Drug Inspector after a price‑fixation notification under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995. The issue was whether the notified ceiling price became operative for all sales immediately, or whether manufacturers could continue …
The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Bombay High Court order that quashed a seizure of sunglasses on the ground that they were not a "pre‑packed commodity" under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976. The issue was whether sunglasses (and similar items such as watches, phones, …
The State of Maharashtra seized several packaged food items from the respondent's godown alleging that the outer packs, which the authorities treated as wholesale packages, lacked the mandatory declarations required under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The …
A complaint under Section 19 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 alleged violations of Rules 2, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 23 of the Packaged Commodities Rules, but failed to identify the individual(s) responsible for the day‑to‑day affairs of the company. The appellant, then Deputy General …
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 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 Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 4A of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, which levied tax on the first point sale of drugs, medicines and formulations by wholesalers to retailers based on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) printed on the package rather than the actual …
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 …
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 …
The respondent filed a consumer complaint alleging that India Photographic Co. Ltd., a distributor of Kodak film rolls, sold the rolls without printing the sale price on each package, contrary to Rule 6(1)(t) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The District …
