Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Collector of C.E. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Collector of C.E. vs Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided May 26, 1987
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/3497

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
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

Collector of C.E.

Respondent

Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(1989)(42)ELT151TriDel

Excerpt

1. the revenue has come forward with this appeal against the order of the collector (appeals), calcutta, dated 15.11.82. the respondents cut out trough from cold rolled sheets (coil ends) in the form of 'u' shape to place it inside the ingot mould. this trough is used to absorb the heat of the hard metal. the cut ends are non-duty paid and the duties are demanded at the appropriate rate after collecting the particulars of such troughs. the appellate collector rejected the appeal of the appellant against a demand of rs. 90,942.65 issued by the superintendent, rourkela.2. when the appeal was taken up, shri h.l.verma submitted that the order-in-appeal could not be sustained because notification no.75/67, dated 20.5.67 would not apply.3 shri s.p.kampani, consultant, drew our attention to order no. 694 to 711/86, dated 4.11.86. he submitted that an identical issue has been considered by the tribunal in the above appeals and the same ratio would apply to this appeal also.4. we have held in the orders cited above, following similar earlier orders of the tribunal and held that the troughs were made from scrap and were entirely used and consumed in the manufacture of ingots and merged with the ingots in the same way as the rest of the steel melting scrap. applying the ratio of that we hold that the present appeal cannot be sustained. the appeal is, therefore, rejected.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue has come forward with this Appeal against the order of the Collector (Appeals), Calcutta, dated 15.11.82. The Respondents cut out Trough from Cold Rolled Sheets (Coil ends) in the form of 'U' shape to place it inside the ingot mould. This Trough is used to absorb the heat of the hard metal. The cut ends are non-duty paid and the duties are demanded at the appropriate rate after collecting the particulars of such Troughs. The Appellate Collector rejected the Appeal of the Appellant against a demand of Rs. 90,942.65 issued by the Superintendent, Rourkela.

2. When the Appeal was taken up, Shri H.L.Verma submitted that the Order-in-Appeal could not be sustained because Notification No.75/67, dated 20.5.67 would not apply.

3 Shri S.P.Kampani, Consultant, drew our attention to Order No. 694 to 711/86, dated 4.11.86. He submitted that an identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the above appeals and the same ratio would apply to this Appeal also.

4. We have held in the orders cited above, following similar earlier orders of the Tribunal and held that the Troughs were made from scrap and were entirely used and consumed in the manufacture of ingots and merged with the ingots in the same way as the rest of the steel melting scrap. Applying the ratio of that we hold that the present Appeal cannot be sustained. The Appeal is, therefore, rejected.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial