Advanced Search Results

Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy Vs. Grasim Industries Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 5A(1); Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 173Q; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955 - Sections 2

Reported in : AIR2005SC4101; 2005(99)ECC713; 2005(183)ELT123(SC); JT2005(4)SC270; (2005)4SCC194

case may be, and falling with the Chapter, heading No. or sub-heading No. of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) (hereinafter referred to as the said Schedule), specified in the corresponding entry in column (2)

Sangam Spinners Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Rules 1944 - Rule 57G read with Rule 57B; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Chapter 55

said table it was provided that high speed diesel oil which fell under tariff entry 2710.31 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, would not be considered as eligible input and it was specifically excluded from the list of eligible inputs. … we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.8. Counsel appearing for the parties drew our attention to Chapter V of the Rules which deals with levy of excise duty on manufactured goods other than salt. Rule

Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi Vs. Frick India Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 14A and 35L; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

Reported in : 2007(121)ECC377; 2007(147)LC377(SC); 2007(216)ELT497(SC); 2007(11)SCALE366; 2007AIRSCW6378

India Ltd., Faridabad, (M/s. FIL) manufactures air-conditioning and refrigerating machinery and appliances classifiable under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.3. Assessee cleared compressors falling under tariff sub-heading 8414.10. They also cleared to its buyers separately 'fly wheel' under

Sukhi India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Excise

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 14

Reported in : 2003(89)ECC847,2003(156)ELT35(Cal)

carries on business of manufacturing reprocessed plastic agglomerates/granules falling under Chapter 39 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and sells such finished products, inter alia, in the Domestic Tariff Area, which is commonly known as DTA

Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-iii

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 - Rules 2, 3(1), 6, 6(1) and 14; Additional Duties of Excise (Textile and Textile Articles) Act, 1978 - Sections 3, 3(2), 4 and 4(2); Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 - Sections 3; Finance Act, 2001 - Sections 65, 66 and 136; Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931; Finance Act, 2003 - Sections 157; Customs Tariff Act - Sections 3; Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931; Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 - Sections 91, 93, 95; Central Excise Rules, 2000 - Rules 3(1), 7, 9 and 16(2); CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004

Reported in : 2009(168)LC87(SC); 2009(240)ELT641(SC); JT2009(11)SC8; 2009(11)SCALE446; (2009)9SCC193; [2009]18STJ323(SC); [2009]22STT54; 2009(7)LC3257(SC)

Maruti Suzuki Ltd. (appellant) is engaged in the business of manufacturing motor vehicles falling under Chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. These motor vehicles are cleared on payment of duty. Assessee claimed CENVAT credit on 'input' in accordance with … credit of additional duty leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act on goods falling under heading 98.01 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act.2. Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-rule (1), the manufacturer or

Mrf Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

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

Subject : MRTP

Reported in : (1999)(105)ELT619Tri(Chennai)

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

Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi Vs. Ishaan Research Lab (P) Ltd. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act - Sections 4(4), 11A and 11A(1); Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Sections 3 and 4; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Central Excise Rules - Rules 9(2), 173Q and 209A

Reported in : 2008(230)ELT7(SC); JT2008(10)SC1; 2008(12)SCALE270; 2008AIRSCW6235; 2008(6)Supreme558

or mis-statement. Charge of suppression is not sustainable. Proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Act is not applicable. CENTRAL EXCISE TARIFF ACT, 1985. Chapter 33, Heading 33-04, sub-heading 3304 & Heading 33.05; Chapter 30, Heading 33.03; Sub-heading 3003.19 : Medicament or cosmetic … the product claimed as Ayurvedic Medicament. This Court went into the questions in detail. It was argued that 98% of Bhanpool Oil consists of 'til oil' and remaining 2% are Ayurvedic ingredients like amla, chandan camphor, etc.,

Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Karnataka Agro Chemicals

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 11A; Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1985 - Sections 2

Reported in : 2008(129)ECC53; 2008(155)LC53(SC); 2008(227)ELT12(SC); JT2008(7)SC236; 2008(9)SCALE390; (2008)7SCC343

Revenue) and Ministry of Agriculture, there was therefore no justification to invoke large limitation period to impose penalty. CENTRAL EXCISE TARIFF ACT, 1985. Chapter 31 (Fertilisers), Note 6, Heading 31.05, Sub-Heading 3105.00 (Mineral or chemical fertilizers) & Chapter 38 (Miscellaneous chemical products),

Charak Pharmaceuticals (i) Ltd Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Excise

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Finance Act, 1962 - Sections 86 to 98

Reported in : 2000IIAD(Delhi)363; 2000(52)DRJ544; 2000(67)ECC749

Matched in: Advocate Mr. A.R. Madhav Rao and; Mr. K. Srinivasan, Advs Mr. U. Hazarika, Central Govt. Standing Counsel

Jaypee Forges Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (1996)(83)ELT49TriDel

is that the appellants claimed that their products were classifiable under Chapter 72 or Chapter 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 whereas the department was of the view that the forgings had acquired the essential character of motor vehicles … again another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Echjay Industries Ltd. reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 98 were also cited and relied upon by the Id. Chartered Accountant in support of his contention; that in