Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Gujarat Borosil Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Gujarat Borosil Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 13, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/24994

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/24994
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Aug 13, 2001
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

Gujarat Borosil Ltd.

Excerpt

1. in the impugned order, the commissioner (appeals) has found that the respondent did not use straw and bricks and other material that she has specified i n packing the goods that it sold to buyers in the market at the factory gate, and therefore held that the cost of such packing is not includable in the assessable value of the goods.2. the appeal relies upon the judgment of the supreme court in uoi v.mrf 1995 (77) elt 432. in that judgment the supreme court, citing its earlier judgment in ponds (i) ltd. 1989 (44) elt 185 said that it is the cost of such packing in which the goods are generally sold in the wholesale market that is to be included. that packing, as we have seen, did not include the bricks and straw. we therefore find no reason to interfere.

Full Judgment

1. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has found that the respondent did not use straw and bricks and other material that she has specified i n packing the goods that it sold to buyers in the market at the factory gate, and therefore held that the cost of such packing is not includable in the assessable value of the goods.

2. The appeal relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in UOI v.MRF 1995 (77) ELT 432. In that judgment the Supreme Court, citing its earlier judgment in Ponds (I) Ltd. 1989 (44) ELT 185 said that it is the cost of such packing in which the goods are generally sold in the wholesale market that is to be included. That packing, as we have seen, did not include the bricks and straw. We therefore find no reason to interfere.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Gujarat Borosil Ltd. Same Subject Land Acquisition