WavIn India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

WavIn India Ltd. vs Collector of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 05, 1987

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/3277

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/3277
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Mar 05, 1987
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

WavIn India Ltd.

Respondent

Collector of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (1987)(11)LC652Tri(Delhi)

Excerpt

.....t.i. 15a(2) only.2. the lower authorities on the strength of declaration made under the provisional collection taxes act, 1931 in respect of finance bill, 1982 held that the appellants product moulded plastic articles would fall under tariff item 68 between this period and not tariff item 15a(2) as claimed by the appellants.3. shri chimurkar, learned advocate for the appellants in support of the appellants claim that the peroducts continued to fall under t.i.15a(2) and were eligible for benefit of exemption notification 149/82, dated 22.4.1982 relied on a decision of the tribunal in collector of central excise, pune v. pieco electronics & electricals ltd., 1986 (6) ecr 416 (cegat). this decision had dealt with this very finance bill, the very product and the effect of declaration under section 3 of provisional collection of taxes act, 1931 with respect to the finance bill. shri a.k. rajhans, the learned jdr after going through the decision agreed that the tribunal decision covered the issues involved in the present appeal and that according to this decision the appellants product moulded plastic articles would continue to fall under t.i. 15a(2) and not t.i. 68 as held by the lower authorities.4. following the decision it is held that the appellants product continued to fall under t.i. 15a(2) of cet and not t.i. 68 as held by the lower authorities.5. the appeal is thus allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.

Full Judgment

1. The question for decision in this appeal is classification of the appellants product plastic articles between the period 1.3.1982 to 11.5.1982 consequent to introduction of Finance Bill 1982 in the Parliament on 28.2.1982 - whether the products continued to fall between this period under item 15A(2) as was the position earlier or stood transferred consequent on the introduction of Finance Bill to T.I. 68. Allied question would be eligibility of the appellants to benefit of exemption notification 149/82-CE, dated 22.4.1982 which was available in respect of goods falling under T.I. 15A(2) only.

2. The lower authorities on the strength of declaration made under the Provisional Collection Taxes Act, 1931 in respect of Finance Bill, 1982 held that the appellants product moulded plastic articles would fall under Tariff Item 68 between this period and not Tariff Item 15A(2) as claimed by the appellants.

3. Shri Chimurkar, learned advocate for the appellants in support of the appellants claim that the peroducts continued to fall under T.I.15A(2) and were eligible for benefit of exemption notification 149/82, dated 22.4.1982 relied on a decision of the Tribunal in Collector of Central Excise, Pune v. Pieco Electronics & Electricals Ltd., 1986 (6) ECR 416 (Cegat). This decision had dealt with this very Finance Bill, the very product and the effect of declaration under Section 3 of Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 with respect to the Finance Bill. Shri A.K. Rajhans, the learned JDR after going through the decision agreed that the Tribunal decision covered the issues involved in the present appeal and that according to this decision the appellants product moulded plastic articles would continue to fall under T.I. 15A(2) and not T.I. 68 as held by the lower authorities.

4. Following the decision it is held that the appellants product continued to fall under T.I. 15A(2) of CET and not T.I. 68 as held by the lower authorities.

5. The appeal is thus allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties WavIn India Ltd. vs Collector of Central Excise Same Subject Land Acquisition