Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: central excise tariff act 1985 chapter 2 · Page 1 of about 3,032 results (0.040 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Sep 21 2000

Bamni Proteins Limited Vs. Ajay (Shri)

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-21-2000

Subject : Contempt of CourtExcise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 11A; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 9(2); Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 2

Reported in : 2001(2)BomCR744

to why the Di-Calcium Phosphate (Animal Feed Grade) should not be classified under Chapter Sub-heading No. 2835.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, attracting Central Excise Duty @ 6 per cent ad valorem and why the Central Excise Duty to the … Counsel for the respondent.2. The contempt petition is preferred by the petitioner for violation of the order dated 23-8-1999, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1159 of 1999.3. The learned Counsel

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 20 2007

Adhunik Food Products (P) Ltd., U.P. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excis ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-20-2007

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Central Excises Act, 1944 - Sections 5A(1)

Reported in : 2007(117)ECC296; 2007LC296(SC); 2007(211)ELT360(SC); JT2007(8)SC338; 2007(6)SCALE22; (2007)9SCC32; 2007(1)LC605(SC)

of the Table hereto annexed and falling under the Chapter or sub-heading No. of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said Table, from so much

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 16 2010

The Commissioner of Central ] Excise and Custom, Daman, Vs. M/S. Gujch ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-16-2010

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Chapters 22, 28, 29, 34, 38 and 39; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rules 57A, 53, 223B, 9(2); Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 - Sections 11A, 34,6

various products, which are, excisable goods failling under Chapters 22, 28, 29, 34, 38 and 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are also availing modvat facility under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (herein after for … stated thus :The Respondents herein are engaged in manufacture of various products, which are, excisable goods failling under Chapters 22, 28, 29, 34, 38 and 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are also availing … filed by the Revenue against the Judgment and Order dated 13th January 2004 passed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai raises

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Oct 03 2005

The Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi Vs. Hari Chand Shri Gopa ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-03-2005

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rules 8, 9, 47, 49A(1), 52A, 54, 57G, 57T, 173B, 173B(1), 173FF, 173G, 173G(1), 173G(3), 173K, 174, 174(1), 174A, 192, 196, 196(1) and 224(1); ;Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Sections 11A and 14; ;Central Excises Act, 1944 - Sections 5A(1); ;Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 - Sections 3(3); ;Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 233B; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 109, 116 and 161

Reported in : AIR2005SC3595; 2005(102)ECC481; 2005(188)ELT353(SC); JT2005(12)SC189; 2005(8)SCALE58; (2005)8SCC164

judgment in civil appeal nos.5747-5749 of 2000 that this kimam was excisable and classifiable under sub-heading 2404.49/2404.40 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Admittedly, the existence of assessees' units in Delhi, where kimam was manufactured, was not disclosed to the department, … law involved in this matter is - whether irrespective of the assessees having not followed or substantially followed Chapter X procedure under the Central Excise Rules, 1944, they would still be entitled to the benefit of notification … given when intended use of material can be established by other evidence. 2. This case is a sequel to the case of the assessees in

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 1997

Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-05-1997

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Central Excises Act, 1944 - Sections 5A

Reported in : AIR1997SC1176; 1997(92)ELT294(SC); JT1997(3)SC282; 1997(2)SCALE481; (1997)3SCC515; [1997]2SCR718

the manufacture of Ethylene, Propylene, Benzene, Toluene and other products falling under Chapters 27 and 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. At the material time the appellant obtained raw naphtha from the Refinery in terms of Notification No. 27/89-C.E. … appellant is engaged, inter alia, in the manufacture of Ethylene, Propylene, Benzene, Toluene and other products falling under Chapters 27 and 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. At the material time the appellant obtained raw

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 06 2000

Wipro Ltd. and Panchajanya Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Decided on : Jun-06-2000

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2000)(71)ECC326

(c) that bathing bars (soaps containing less than 60% TFM merit classification under Chapter sub-heading 3307.39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; (d) and that as per the Quality Control reports of the appellants the said 'Santoor Soaps' contain TFM … Controller (India), Directorate of Health Services, New Delhi, the soap manufacturers should adhere to BIS Standard No. IS 2888:1983and no toilet soap containing less than 60% FM (Total Fatty Matter) should be marketed and further that bathing

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 16 1998

itc Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Decided on : Apr-16-1998

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (1998)(77)LC411Tri(Chennai)

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 21 2004

Borax Morarji Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-21-2004

Subject : Excise

Reported in : (2004)(97)ECC421

of Central Excise Act respectively.2. The appellants manufacture excisable goods falling under Chapter heading 28, 29 & 39 Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. The dispute pertains to a product called 'AGRIBOR' which was classified by the appellants as 'other fertilizer' falling

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 13 2009

Dharampal Satyapal Limited Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer,

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-13-2009

Subject : ExciseSales Tax/VAT

Acts : Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Sections 3, 3A, 3B, 3(2) and 8; Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - Sections 14 and 15; Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957; Finance Act, 1996; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Central Administrative Act; Finance Act, 1995; Finance Act, 2001; Central Excise Act; Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act; State Sales Tax Act - Sections 8; Delhi Sales Tax Act; Minimum Wages Act; Orissa Sales Tax Act; Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act; Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 - Sections 7; Constitution of India - Articles 246, 286 and 286(3)

Reported in : 2009(243)ELT179(Mad); (2009)24VST193(Mad)

with the product description in the CET Act with effect from 16.3.1988. By Finance Act 2 of 1996, Chapter Heading 2404 of the Central Excise Tariff Act was re-cast and substituted, and chewing tobacco preparations earlier covered … it occurs after Heading 21.06. The petitioners were originally paying excise duty on these goods as per the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 ('CET Act' in short) under Heading 21.06 upto 9.10.2000 and thereafter, they are paying central excise duty and

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 04 2010

Commnr.of Central Excise, ... Vs. M/S. TarpaulIn International

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-04-2010

Subject : Central Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Schedule 63.01 , Section 2(f), 11, 5(e), 3, 2(d), 2(f)(ii), Chapter 63, 63.01;

cutting, stitching and fixing of eye-lets amounts to manufacture and, hence, they are exigible to duty under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short `the Act').3) A show cause notice was issued by a competent authority dated 31.8.1995, inter alia … 31.8.1995, inter alia directing the noticee to show cause as to why tarpaulin made-ups be not classified under chapter sub-heading 63.01 and the corresponding duty of Rs.57,33,262/- be demanded. The assessees had filed their replies inter alia … as follows: we take M/s Tarpaulin International Civil Appeal No. 5341 of 2005 as the lead case. The noticee is carrying on the business of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial