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

2004 Supreme(SC) 341

S. B. SINHA, S. H. KAPADIA
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Mumbai-ii – Appellant
Versus
Allied Photographics India LTD. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kapadia, J.-Finding inconsistencies between two decisions of three-Judge Benches of this Court in the case of Sinkhai Synthetics and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [2002 (143) ELT 17] and Collector of Central Excise, Chennai v. T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd. [2003 (156) ELT 161] on one hand and the decision of nine-Judge Constitution Bench in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [(1997) 5 SCC 536] on the other, a two-Judge Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.11.2003 has referred the following question of law involved in this civil appeal to a larger Bench and accordingly the matter has come before this court.

"Whether a claim for refund after final assessment is governed by Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act 1944?

FACTS :

2. New India Industries Ltd. (NIIL) is incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and carries on business of manufacturing photographic printing paper which became chargeable to excise duty vide tariff item No. 37-C(2) of the Central Excise Act 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") with effect from March 1, 1974. NIIL had entered into distribution agreement with a firm, Agfa Gevaert (India) Ltd. (M/s AGIL) for supply of goods. On 8.






































































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