Greysham and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Greysham and Co. vs Commissioner of Central Excise,

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 06, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/27772

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/27772
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: S Kang, a T V.K.
Decided On: Mar 06, 2002
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

Greysham and Co.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(142)ELT705TriDel

Excerpt

2. the issue involved in this appeal is in respect of classification of water dispenser performing two functions of dispensing water and dispensing hot or cold water. the revenue wants to classify the same under heading 8517.00 of the central excise tariff whereas the claim of the applicants is under heading 8479.00 of the central excise tariff.we find the issue is covered by the decision of the tribunal in the case of cce, meerut v. hello mineral water p. ltd. [2001 (130) e.l.t.716 (t)]. in this case, the tribunal held that water dispenser performing two functions of dispensing water and dispensing hot or cold water at users option are classifiable under heading 8479.00 of the central excise tariff. in view of the above decision of the tribunal, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

Full Judgment

2. The issue involved in this Appeal is in respect of classification of water dispenser performing two functions of dispensing water and dispensing hot or cold water. The Revenue wants to classify the same under Heading 8517.00 of the Central Excise Tariff whereas the claim of the applicants is under Heading 8479.00 of the Central Excise Tariff.

We find the issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Meerut v. Hello Mineral Water P. Ltd. [2001 (130) E.L.T.716 (T)]. In this case, the Tribunal held that water dispenser performing two functions of dispensing water and dispensing hot or cold water at users option are classifiable under Heading 8479.00 of the Central Excise Tariff. In view of the above decision of the Tribunal, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Greysham and Co. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge S Kang, a T V.K.