SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 960

SUJATA V.MANOHAR, K.VENKATASWAMI
Collector Of Central Excise, Baroda – Appellant
Versus
M. M. Khambhatwala – Respondent


JUDGMENT

K. Venkataswami, J.-This appeal is preferred against the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the CEGAT) dated 27-7-87.

2. The short point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant was right in treating the respondents as manufacturers of agarbatti, amlapodi and dhup etc. even though they were manufactured in various premises of the household ladies outside the factory of the respondents.

3. Briefly the facts are as follows :

During the year 1980-81 the respondents were manufacturers of goods falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 14F of the Central Excise Tariff under a Central Excise Licence obtained for the purpose. The total clearances of such goods during the said year amounted to Rs. 14,88,268.00. In addition they were also manufacturing goods falling under Tariff Item 68 in their own factory and were availing of the exemption from duty and licencing control under Notification No. 105/80-CE dated 19.6.80. The value of such goods during the relevant year manufactured amounted to Rs. 3,21,605.00. Apart from the above two items, respondents were getting agarbatti, amlapodi an













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top