Cce Vs. Hickson and Dadajee Ltd.

Cce vs Hickson and Dadajee Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jan 23, 1998

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/12709

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/12709
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: U Bhat, S T K.
Decided On: Jan 23, 1998
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce

Respondent

Hickson and Dadajee Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (1998)(75)LC812Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. respondent, manufacturing two varieties of dyes and selling the same to wholesalers and on contract to industrial consumers, filed price list in part-i declaring the price as rs. 175.00 per kg. and rs. 220.00 per kg. and price list in part-ii declaring the price as rs. 117.50 per kg. and rs. 135.00 per kg. for supply of 1000 kgs. to industrial consumer. the assistant collector approved the price list directing that part-i price list will govern the contract covered by part-ii price list. collector (appeals) set aside this order and held that the contract will govern prices in price list in part-ii which were less than the declared part-i price. this order is now challenged by the department.2. the industrial consumer buying huge quantities of dyes is a separate class of buyer, distinct from the wholesale buyers in respect of whom part-i price list was filed. therefore, it would be contrary to law to assess the goods contracted to be sold at the same price as the price shown in part-i. the difference in prices is also justified on consideration of the huge quantity contracted for purchase.

Full Judgment

1. Respondent, manufacturing two varieties of Dyes and selling the same to wholesalers and on contract to industrial consumers, filed price list in Part-I declaring the price as Rs. 175.00 per kg. and Rs. 220.00 per kg. and price list in Part-II declaring the price as Rs. 117.50 per kg. and Rs. 135.00 per kg. for supply of 1000 kgs. to industrial consumer. The Assistant Collector approved the price list directing that Part-I price list will govern the contract covered by Part-II price list. Collector (Appeals) set aside this order and held that the contract will govern prices in price list in Part-II which were less than the declared Part-I price. This order is now challenged by the Department.

2. The industrial consumer buying huge quantities of Dyes is a separate class of buyer, distinct from the wholesale buyers in respect of whom Part-I price list was filed. Therefore, it would be contrary to law to assess the goods contracted to be sold at the same price as the price shown in Part-I. The difference in prices is also justified on consideration of the huge quantity contracted for purchase.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Cce vs Hickson and Dadajee Ltd. Same Subject MRTP Same Judge U Bhat, S T K.